Cuddy v. Sweeney
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the Court
We conclude that the judge acted properly in dismissing the plaintiff’s amended complaint.
The record reveals that the plaintiff put before the judge several documents and records (a number attached to the complaint itself as "exhibits”) in an effort to persuade him that the murky and somewhat unintelligible complaint stated a claim or claims. A consideration of the complaint, the exhibits attached to it, and the other documents and records confirms the judge’s conclusion that the complaint was deficient in several material respects. The first count attempts to state a claim for malicious…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Jones v. Brockton Public Markets, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- DesLauries v. SheaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
- Comerford v. MeierMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
- Hubbard v. Beatty & Hyde, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1961
- Willett v. HerrickMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- One Thousand Fleet Ltd. Partnership v. GuerrieroCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
- Donovan v. GardnerMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2000
- Blount International, Ltd. v. Schuylkill Energy Resources Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1989
- DEBRA HARDING, Individually and as Parent and Next Friend of Child v. THOMAS B. PLANTE and GINETTE PLANTEMassachusetts Superior Court · 2020