In Kirby v. Mousis, the Massachusetts Appeals Court affirmed judgment for the defendants on the plaintiffs’ Chapter 93A, § 11 claim and reinforced that failed business ventures and unmet funding promises generally do not, without more, constitute “unfair or deceptive” conduct under the statute. The dispute arose from an effort to expand a gaming-terminal business into Pennsylvania. The plaintiffs claimed the defendants wrongfully excluded them after the defendants proceeded with the opportunity through a newly formed entity. Following a bench trial, however, the judge found — and the Appeals Court agreed — that the plaintiffs had expressly conditioned their participation in the venture on their ability to raise $1 million in capital, which they failed to satisfy.

The court issued a decisive Chapter 93A ruling. The record showed that the plaintiffs repeatedly represented that they would imminently have substantial funding, but they only raised a small fraction of the required amount and defaulted on a key purchase agreement, which was terminated for nonperformance. In that context, the Appeals Court concluded that the defendants’ decision to move forward without the plaintiffs was not unfair or deceptive. The defendants had given the plaintiffs a legitimate opportunity to participate on clearly defined terms, and the plaintiffs’ inability to meet those terms caused their exclusion. The court emphasized that Chapter 93A requires an assessment of what the parties knew — or should have known — at the time of the challenged conduct. Here, the plaintiffs knew their equity interest depended on raising the agreed-upon capital — and knew they had not done so. Once that condition precedent failed, the defendants had no continuing obligation to include the plaintiffs in the transaction or to disclose that they intended to pursue the opportunity independently. As a result, the plaintiffs’ statutory claim failed, along with their related fiduciary and fraud theories. 

This decision underscores that parties may not be able to turn every claim arising out of an allegedly breached contract into unfair or deceptive business practices claim under Chapter 93A, especially when the contract parties are sophisticated businesspersons or entities.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of David G. Thomas David G. Thomas

David advises on individual and corporate disputes during the entire dispute-resolution life cycle, including through strategic negotiation, mediation, other forms of alternative dispute resolution, and adjudication through trial when needed or required. David has experience with many subject matters, including unfair or deceptive…

David advises on individual and corporate disputes during the entire dispute-resolution life cycle, including through strategic negotiation, mediation, other forms of alternative dispute resolution, and adjudication through trial when needed or required. David has experience with many subject matters, including unfair or deceptive business practices disputes in individual and putative class action settings, including under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A—the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act. Boston magazine selected David as a “Top Lawyer—Class Action” in 2022 and 2023. Also, David works with clients on avoiding disputes proactively by identifying and ameliorating existing or potential dispute risks in business policies and practices.

Photo of Angela C. Bunnell Angela C. Bunnell

Angela Bunnell is a member of the Litigation Practice in Greenberg Traurig’s Boston office. Her practice focuses on defending companies against unfair or deceptive business practices claims in individual and putative class action settings. She also represents companies and individuals responding to civil…

Angela Bunnell is a member of the Litigation Practice in Greenberg Traurig’s Boston office. Her practice focuses on defending companies against unfair or deceptive business practices claims in individual and putative class action settings. She also represents companies and individuals responding to civil investigative demands under various regulatory schemes, including federal and state false claims acts and related enforcement actions brought by federal and state regulatory agencies. Angela also has experience with complex eDiscovery matters, and has been responsible for preservation, collection, review, and production of ESI in state and federal lawsuits. Angela also has experience in representing clients in connection with data security and privacy matters.

Before joining the firm, Angela served as a federal law clerk, providing valuable insight and understanding of the court system and litigation process.

Photo of Abby Druhot Abby Druhot

Abby M. Druhot is a member of the Litigation Practice in Greenberg Traurig’s Boston office.