Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Citation
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Parent Document
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts (state)
- Effective Date
- 2019-02-25
Other Sections in This Document (23)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
- Carnelli v. Bell at Salem Station, 123 N.E.3d 803 (2019)
Full Text
969 charsThe plaintiffs' complaint included claims for fraud and breach of contract, but nowhere in their brief do the plaintiffs challenge, or even mention, the judge's dismissal of those claims. The plaintiffs' general assertion in their brief that the judge erred in dismissing their complaint is insufficient to support an appeal on those claims. See Kellogg v. Board of Registration in Med., 461 Mass. 1001, 1003 (2011), quoting Zora v. State Ethics Comm'n, 415 Mass. 640, 642 n.3 (1993) ("Briefs that limit themselves to 'bald assertions of error' that 'lack[ ] legal argument ... [do not] rise[ ] to the level of appellate argument' required by [Mass. R. A. P.] 16"). Consequently, we deem these issues waived. See Mass. R. A. P. 16 (a) (4), as amended, 367 Mass. 921 (1975); Sullivan v. Chief Justice for Admin. & Mgt. of the Trial Court, 448 Mass. 15, 36 (2006) ("We deem this claim waived as the plaintiffs have failed to address it in their brief before this court").