this three-hour period in reliance on Dickerson’s statement that they had a deal. As a general rule, part “performance or a change in position in reliance on an oral contract to convey land will estop a defendant from raising the Statute of Frau 1947) (noting mere nonperformance of an oral contract within the statute of frauds does not constitute fraud) (citations omitted). Moreover, a fundamental exception to the general notice pleading requirement in Massachusetts is that allegations of fraud shall be stated “with particularity.” Mass.R.Civ.P. 9(b). Normally, this means that the pleading must state the time, place and content of the fraud and what was obtained or given up as a consequence of the fraud. See Wayne Investment, Inc. v. Gulf Oil Corp., 739 F.2d 11, 13 (1st Cir. 1984) (<HOLDING>); Friedman v. Jablonski, 371 Mass. 482 (1976).
holding a complaint failed to satisfy rule 9b where the allegations were lacking in detail holding that specific details about time place and substance of the fraud satisfy rule 9b holding plaintiffs speculations did not satisfy rule 9b requirements holding that charge of money laundering need not satisfy rule 9b holding a broad claim with no factual support was insufficient to satisfy rule 9b