Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 5/13/1992
McDonough v. Marr Scaffolding Co.
Citations
- 591 N.E.2d 1079
- 412 Mass. 636
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- court appropriately granted summary judgment after concluding defendant’s actions were construction activity contemplated by M.G.L. c. 260, § 2B
- breach of warranty claims that sound in tort, not contract, are barred by statute of repose
- plaintiff cannot “nullify” statute of repose by recasting negligence claim as breach of warranty claim
- an actor such as a manufacturer or supplier may be protected if that actor becomes more than a “mere” supplier by engaging in protected activities
- court appropriately granted summary judgment after concluding defendant's actions were construction activity contemplated by M.G.L. c. 260, 2B
- statute protected supplier of bleachers, where supplying the product was incidental to its primary function of performing particularized construction services in assembling and installing bleachers
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Liacos, Wilkins, Abrams, Nolan, O'Connor
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
40 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- prod.liab.rep.(cch)p. 13,776 David Snow v. Harnischfeger CorporationFirst Circuit· 1994-01-26· cited 165×
- Sullivan v. Town of BrooklineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2001-11-14· cited 147×
- Duclersaint v. Federal National Mortgage Ass'nMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1998-07-15· cited 83×
- White v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1998-10-16· cited 52×
- Curtis v. School CommitteeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1995-07-17· cited 31×
- Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Weston & Sampson Engineers, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court· 1998-06-23· cited 27×
- Fine v. Huygens, DiMella, Shaffer & AssociatesMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2003-02-20· cited 22×
- Vergato v. Commercial Union InsuranceMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2001-02-06· cited 20×
- Hurwitz v. BocianMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1996-09-26· cited 17×
- Ball v. Harnischfeger Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma· 1994-06-14· cited 15×
- Rosario v. M.D. Knowlton Co.Massachusetts Appeals Court· 2002-05-22· cited 14×
- Mi-Lor Corp. v. Gottsegen (In Re Mi-Lor Corp.)D. Massachusetts· 1999-05-07· cited 13×
- Bridgwood v. A.J. Wood Construction, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2018-08-29· cited 13×
- Stearns v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2019-03-01· cited 10×
- Apple v. TracyMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1993-06-01· cited 9×
- Jordan v. Sandwell, Inc.W.D. Virginia· 2002-01-31· cited 6×
- Taveras v. RodriquezMass. Dist. Ct., App. Div.· 2000-02-08· cited 6×
- Saveall v. AdamsMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1994-04-21· cited 4×
- Brown v. United StatesD. Massachusetts· 2007-09-26· cited 3×
- Stearns v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.District of Columbia· 2018-03-30· cited 2×
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Augat, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1991-05-14· cited 450×
- Klein v. CatalanoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1982-07-07· cited 233×
- Gaudette v. WebbMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1972-06-05· cited 152×
- Sullivan v. IantoscaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1991-04-17· cited 36×
- Conley v. Scott Products, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1988-02-09· cited 23×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.