Appeals court hears Revolve Realty's challenge to dismissal of fraud and nondisclosure claims

Summary

At oral argument before a three‑justice Massachusetts Appeals Court panel, Revolve Realty argued that trial judges erred in disposing of counterclaims alleging fraudulent omission and that those rulings deprived the company of the chance to pursue defenses and damages; the panel took the matter under advisement.

A three‑judge panel of the Massachusetts Appeals Court heard oral argument in Frank Hennessy and Another v. Revolve Realty Development LLC, docket no. 24P516, on whether trial judges improperly resolved counterclaims for fraudulent omission and related defenses on Rule 12(c) motions and subsequent dispositive rulings.

Why it matters: The appeal raises a narrow but recurring issue in real‑estate litigation — whether a seller’s partial, truthful statements can become misleading and give rise to a duty to disclose under Massachusetts law. A ruling for the appellant could affect how parties and brokers describe transactions in purchase‑and‑sale negotiations.

Attorney Michael Magro, arguing for Revolve Realty and two individual defendants, told the court the dispositive procedural step was an erroneous decision on a Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure Rule…

Appeals court hears Revolve Realty's challenge to dismissal of fraud and nondisclosure claims

Summary

Subscribe to keep reading