Legal Opinion

East Cambridge Savings Bank v. Wheeler

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 8, 1996PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilkins, J.

We consider again the largely uncharted realm of judicial estoppel, a concept that precludes a party in certain circumstances from asserting a position in one proceeding that is contrary to a position that the party previously asserted successfully in another proceeding. See Fay v. Federal Nat’l Mortgage Ass’n, 419 Mass. 782, 787-788 (1995). In the Fay case, we said that “we would apply the doctrine of judicial estoppel at least where a party had successfully asserted his or her inconsistent position in a previous proceeding” (emphasis in original). Id. at 788. There, the plaintiff was not…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Fay v. Federal National Mortgage Ass'nMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1995
  2. Correia v. DeSimoneMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1993
  3. City of Boston v. NielsenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
  4. Gordon v. LewitskyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1955

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Canavan's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2000
  2. Blanchette v. School Committee of WestwoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
  3. Otis v. Arbella Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
  4. Meyer v. WagnerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1999
  5. Commonwealth v. SemedoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2010

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

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

Powered by the Exa API