Lane, et al., v. General Electric
Case Date: 04/02/1998
Court: United States Court of Appeals
Docket No: 97-1710
|
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ____________________ No. 97-1710 ANDREW J. LANE, ET AL., Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CORPORATION, Defendant, Appellee. ____________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Douglas P. Woodlock, U.S. District Judge] ____________________ Before Torruella, Chief Judge, Coffin, Senior Circuit Judge, and Boudin, Circuit Judge. ____________________ Andrew M. Porter, Isaac H. Peres and Franchek & Porter, LLP on brief for appellant. Sabin Willett, Richelle S. Kennedy and Bingham Dana LLP on brief for appellee. ____________________ March 31, 1998 ____________________ Per Curiam. Essentially for the reasons stated by the district court in its ruling on April 30, 1997, we conclude that the complaint properly was dismissed. We add only this comment. The Massachusetts state court already has expressed a view of the definition and duties of a "competitor," which view is contrary to that advocated here by plaintiffs. Doliner v. Brown, 21 Mass. App. 692, 695, 489 N.E.2d 1036, 1038-39 (1986). In the context of this Massachusetts dispute, we have no reason to impose the differing view of a court of another state. See Dolton v. Capital Federal Savings & Loan Assoc., 642 P.2d 21, 23 (Colo. App. 1981). Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1. |