Legal Opinion

Hillis v. Lake

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided March 6, 1995No. 94-P-1318PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGillbrman, J.

After a jury-waived trial, a judge of the Superior Court concluded that the plaintiffs were entitled to be paid a broker’s commission in the amount of $54,000, plus interest. The judge also awarded the plaintiffs their reasonable attorney’s fees and costs under G. L. c. 93A because she *222concluded that the defendants had acted wilfully in violation of G. L. c. 9 3A, § 2, but she did not award the plaintiffs multiple damages. Both parties have appealed. We reverse the judgment for the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs’ claim to a commission is bound into the course of dealings between the defendants and…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Lewis v. EmersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984
  2. Tristram's Landing, Inc. v. WaitMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  3. Bump v. RobbinsMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1987
  4. Capezzuto v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
  5. Bonin v. Chestnut Hill Towers Realty Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Hillis v. LakeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1995
  2. Commonwealth v. LaffondMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1995

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API