Miller v. Fickett

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Miller v. Fickett

432 Mass. 1028

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided November 21, 2000·Published

Opinion

A judge in the Superior Court entered summary judgment against the plaintiffs and in favor of the defendants Remax New Horizons and Suanne DeFrancesco (defendants). The Appeals Court affirmed the judgment, holding that the defendants did not breach any duty to the plaintiffs. Miller v. Fickett, 48 Mass. App. Ct. 654 (2000). We granted the plaintiffs’ application for further appellate review.

For the reasons stated in the opinion of the Appeals Court, we affirm the judgment of the Superior Court.

So ordered.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

A judge in the Superior Court entered summary judgment against the plaintiffs and in favor of the defendants Remax New Horizons and Suanne DeFrancesco (defendants). The Appeals Court affirmed the judgment, holding that the defendants did not breach any duty to the plaintiffs. Miller v. Fickett, 48 Mass. App. Ct. 654 (2000). We granted the plaintiffs’ application for further appellate review.

For the reasons stated in the opinion of the Appeals Court, we affirm the judgment of the Superior Court.

So ordered.

Miller v. Fickett, 432 Mass. 1028 (Mass. 2000).

Pincite

432 Mass. 1028 (Miller v. Fickett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related