Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

4 Mass. App. Ct. 768

Romanoff v. Balcom

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided January 19, 1976

Massachusetts Appeals Court · decided 1976-01-19

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently February 2021

1 federal appellate ·

Relies on Craig v. Everett M. Brooks Co. · Graphic Arts Finishers, Inc. v. Boston Redevelopment Authority · Exchange Bank v. Rich

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1976-01-19

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1The complaint was properly dismissed under Mass.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), 365 Mass. 755 (1974). No claim is stated for deceit (see Graphic Arts Finishers, Inc. v. Boston Redevelopment Authy. 357 Mass. 40, 44 [1970]) or negligent misrepresentation (see Craig v. Everett M. Brooks Co. 351 Mass. 497, 499-501 [1967]) because the plaintiff made the loan prior to the alleged misrepresentation and could not have relied on the rep*769resentation. Nor is there stated a claim against the defendant individually on the alleged corporate assumption of Patterson’s debt. The facts alleged do not bring the case within the exception to the third-party beneficiary rule for money held for creditors (Exchange Bank v. Rice, 107 Mass. 37, 42 [1871]) or indicate grounds for liability under G. L. c. 156B, §§ 61, 63.

The case was submitted on briefs.Marc S. Alpert for the plaintiff.John R. Hicinbothem for the defendant.

¶2Judgment affirmed.

/4/massappct/768 · .json · Public domain