Wasserman v. Agnastopoulos

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the tor-tious interference claim was so “intertwined factually with the merits of the claim under c. 93A that the judge would not have been required to segregate out more than a nominal portion of total hours expended ... in arriving at an appropriate attorneys fee”
• excising a nominal portion to account for the non-chapter 93A aspects of the case
• “for conduct to violate the standard of [the Massachusetts Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act] ... it must be unethical or unscrupulous ... ”
• G. L. c. 93A “does not contemplate an overly precious standard of ethical or moral behavior. It is the standard of the commercial market place . . .”
• where a violation of the standard of fairness imposed by c. 93A resulted from the negligent failure to clarify ownership, not “the intentional employment of sharp practices,” the penalty provisions of Section 11 were unwarranted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).