Provident Funding Associates, LP v. Jones, 31 Mass. L. Rptr. 37 (2013)

Citation: Provident Funding Associates, LP v. Jones, 31 Mass. L. Rptr. 37 (2013)
Parent Document: Provident Funding Associates, LP v. Jones, 31 Mass. L. Rptr. 37 (2013)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 2013-02-27
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8358209/provident-funding-associates-lp... ↗

Full Text

689 chars

Likewise, Counterclaim II (G.L.c. 93A) is barred by claim preclusion. The 93A claim in the Henry I complaint recites almost verbatim the reasons in support of the 93A counterclaim here. As Judge Kaplan stated in his decision, “Ms. Hemy has not demonstrated that a failure to investigate a SISA loan in August 2007 then fell within the penumbra of some statutory, regulatory or other established concept of unfairness . . . For these reasons, the court concludes that, in this case, a failure to investigate the statements in the Santos loan application did not violate G.L.c. 93A, §2.” Henry, SUCV2011-1332, slip op. at 8. Accordingly, Counterclaim II is dismissed. Mass.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(9).

Other Sections in This Document (41)

Full Text