Legal Opinion

McCarthy v. Quirk Nissan, Inc.

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided September 15, 2009PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHand, J.

On April 23, 2006, plaintiff Paul E. McCarthy (“McCarthy”) purchased from defendant Quirk Nissan, Inc. (“Quirk”) a 2002 Nissan Maxima (“the car”). On June 21, 2006, as a result of recurring mechanical problems with the car, including illumination of the “check engine” light and engine stalling during normal operation, McCarthy wrote to Quirk rescinding his acceptance of the car pursuant to G.L.c. 90, §7Nl/4, the Massachusetts “Lemon Law.” The letter included a G.L.c. 93A demand for relief. In a written response, Quirk disputed the existence of a “covered defect” for the purposes of §7Nl/4,…

2Cases cited49 opinions

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
  3. Linthicum v. ArchambaultMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
  4. Slaney v. Westwood Auto, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  5. Commonwealth v. LaniganMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1994

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Brown v. Norfolk & Dedham Mutual Fire InsuranceMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2011
  2. CJ/Queen Annes Gate Apartments v. AndersonMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2012
  3. Reznik v. YeltonMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2011
  4. Chiang v. KuzoianMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API