Legal Opinion
Cassano v. Gogos
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided July 11, 1985PublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKass, J.
The teeth of the judgment in this construction defect case, from which the defendant has appealed, are rooted in a claim under G. L. c. 93A. As a threshold question we consider whether the plaintiff dispatched to the defendant an adequate demand letter. Such a letter is a prerequisite to an action under c. 93A, § 9(3). Slaney v. Westwood Auto, Inc., 366 Mass. 688, 704-705 (1975). Rita v. Carella, 394 Mass. 822, 824 n.3 (1985).
No invocation of c. 93A or reference to it, specifically or genetically, appears in what purports to be the statutory letter. In terms, it may be argued, G. L. c. 93A, §…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Slaney v. Westwood Auto, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- Heller v. Silverbranch Construction Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
- New England Canteen Service, Inc. v. AshleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
- Spring v. Geriatric Authority of HolyokeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
- Leardi v. BrownMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Passatempo v. McMenimenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2012
- Cigal v. Leader Development Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1990
- Multi Technology, Inc. v. Mitchell Management Systems, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1988
- Halper v. DemeterMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1993
- Richards v. Arteva Specialties S.A.R.L.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2006
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.