ivp pharmaceutical v. tufts associated, 298 f.3d 123, 1st cir. (2002)

2
298 F.3d 123 IVP PHARMACEUTICAL CARE, INC., Plaintiff, Appellant, v. TUFTS ASSOCIATED HEALTH PLANS, INC., Defendant, Appellee.  No. 01-2671. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.  Heard April 2, 2002.  Decided August 12, 2002.  Notes: Of the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Morris E. Lasker, *  U.S. District Judge] Geoffrey S. Harper, with whom Lawrence K. Kalodney, Fish & Richardso n P.C. were on brief, for appellant. James J. Marcellino, with whom Greg A. Friedholm and McDermott, Will & Emery were on brief, for appellee. Before BOUDIN, Chief Judge, BOWNES, Senior Circuit Judge, and LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. PER CURIAM. 1 We affirm. The district court has written a comprehensive extensive opinion which correctly states the relevant contract law of Massachusetts. There is no  point in res tating wh at the dist rict court ha s already sai d clearly and correctly. We, therefore, adopt the district court opinion. *

Upload: scribd-government-docs

Post on 02-Mar-2018

218 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

7/26/2019 IVP Pharmaceutical v. Tufts Associated, 298 F.3d 123, 1st Cir. (2002)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ivp-pharmaceutical-v-tufts-associated-298-f3d-123-1st-cir-2002 1/1

298 F.3d 123

IVP PHARMACEUTICAL CARE, INC., Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

TUFTS ASSOCIATED HEALTH PLANS, INC., Defendant,

Appellee.

 No. 01-2671.

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

 Heard April 2, 2002.

 Decided August 12, 2002.

 Notes:

Of the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Morris E. Lasker,* U.S.

District Judge]

Geoffrey S. Harper, with whom Lawrence K. Kalodney, Fish &

Richardson P.C. were on brief, for appellant.

James J. Marcellino, with whom Greg A. Friedholm and McDermott, Will

& Emery were on brief, for appellee.

Before BOUDIN, Chief Judge, BOWNES, Senior Circuit Judge, and

LIPEZ, Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM.

1 We affirm. The district court has written a comprehensive extensive opinion

which correctly states the relevant contract law of Massachusetts. There is no

 point in restating what the district court has already said clearly and correctly.

We, therefore, adopt the district court opinion.

*