John Broccoli v. Walter Manning

Citations

• 208 A.3d 1146

Syllabus

The plaintiff, John Broccoli, a pro se litigant, was before the Supreme Court on appeal from the entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendant, attorney Walter Manning. On appeal, the plaintiff argued that the Superior Court erred in applying a three-year statute of limitations to his \breach of contract with fraud\ claim. The Supreme Court first concluded that the plaintiff's arguments were waived under the Court's \raise-or-waive\ rule for failure to meaningfully develop or discuss what error was allegedly committed on the part of the hearing justice in the case. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court addressed the issue on appeal and held that the plaintiff's \breach of contract with fraud\ claim, which centered on the defendant's attempt to obtain a mortgage-modification agreement for the plaintiff, arose from a professional relationship, and, thus, was subject to the three-year statute of limitations. The Court also deemed the plaintiff's breach of contract argument meritless because the record was devoid of any evidence that a contract, express or implied, existed between the parties. Finally, the Court held that the hearing justice correctly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment because the plaintiff's complaint, filed on July 1, 2016, was barred by the statute of limitations, which ran on March 15, 2016. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Superior Court.