Case law

United States v. Salemme

164 F. Supp. 2d 49 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 13, 1998

O’Sullivan’s records occurred. 4 The Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (“OCDETF”) was established during my tenure in the United States Attorney’s Office. … Rather, he was suggesting that a judge might reject the application because the information it contained was not presented clearly. In any event, the application as approved by Mr.

United States v. Nanlo, Inc.

519 F. Supp. 723 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 3, 1981

The propriety of this procedure is firmly established. … The authority of the FTC to request the QFR is clearly established here, see Part II, B, supra, and I do not understand Nanlo to seriously challenge the relevancy of the information sought.

Baird v. Davoren

346 F. Supp. 515 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 4, 1972

of delegates chosen by qualified voters at caucuses held in each ward or town, *518 as provided in chapter 53, section 2. … At a first election to be held in a newly established ward, the number of signatures of voters upon a nomination paper of a candidate who is to be voted for only in such ward shall be at least fifty.

In Re Aircrash Dis. at Boston, Mass., July 31, 1973

412 F. Supp. 959 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 19, 1976

On the basis of this evidence (clearly established by the flight profile) Captain Ball made the highly significant admission that there was error by the pilot in not ordering the copilot to rely on raw data earlier than he … Taylor which clearly overrode any obligation he might otherwise have had to perform the third priority additional service of transmitting weather information to D 723.

Nakanwagi v. Executive Office of the Trial Court

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 3, 2024

Sovereign Immunity “As a general matter, states are immune under the Eleventh Amendment from private suit in the federal courts, absent their consent.” Wojcik v. … To legally qualify as a supervisor, the person must have “actual authority,” which “primarily consists of the power to hire, fire, demote, promote, transfer, or discipline an employee.” Velazquez-Perez v. Devs.

Porcher v. Barnhart

394 F. Supp. 2d 288 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 12, 2005

At this last step, the burden is on the SSA to establish that there are jobs in the national economy that the claimant could perform. See Ortiz v. … Here, however, the ALJ clearly stated that he based his conclusion that Mr.

Nickless v. Catton

542 B.R. 33 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 17, 2015

However, the Bankruptcy Court’s findings of fact will not be set aside “unless clearly erroneous.” … This exemption applied to qualified homeowners, “upon recording of an elderly or disabled person’s declaration of homestead protection.” Id. Any person sixty-two years of age or older is elderly. Mass. Gen.

Marinelli v. Potter

661 F. Supp. 2d 69 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 22, 2009

Plaintiff here clearly engaged in protected activity by virtue of his participation in EEO processes arising from his allegations of age discrimination. b. … (internal citation omitted). 17 Questions of sovereign immunity further complicate the issue.

Zarrilli v. Snell

2 Mass. Supp. 405 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 9, 1981

S. 41 (1957), the complaint alleges that Zarrilli was a plaintiff in an action to establish the invalidity of a mortgage foreclosure on property owned jointly by Zarrilli and his former wife. … Zarrilli claims that a handwritten notation on the extension by either the court or a clerk on a letter he had filed with the court was not clearly written and, as a result, he was confused as to the date the brief had to

Fisher v. United States

705 F. Supp. 2d 57 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 30, 2010

The junction box was clearly visible to anyone looking at the floor of the crawl space from a sufficient height. (DF 18). … The FTCA waives sovereign immunity for certain negligence claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (b)(1). There is no strict liability under the FTCA. Laird v.

Iwata v. Intel Corp.

349 F. Supp. 2d 135 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 8, 2004

-only establish the former proposition, not the latter. Iwata also cannot establish retaliatory discharge under section 1140, because her Complaint admits that she was unable to return to work. Compl. § 42. … To establish that she was terminated in violation of section 1140, she would first need to make out a prima facie case that: “(1) [s]he had the opportunity to attain rights under an ERISA benefit plan; (2)[s]he was qualified

Sovereign Bank v. Sturgis

863 F. Supp. 2d 75 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 22, 2012

The Sturgises cite no case law establishing that G.L. c. 183, § 27, is a condition precedent to a deficiency action. … If it does, a presumption of preemption arises that is reversible “only if the law can clearly be shown to fit within the confines of paragraph (c).

Amgen, Inc. v. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

581 F. Supp. 2d 160 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 2, 2008

Claim 10 is clearly not drawn to the protein itself or to the process of its production. … The scope of prior art immunized by section 121 nonetheless appears to extend to the '698 patent.

Cooke v. Lynn Sand & Stone Co.

875 F. Supp. 880 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 30, 1994

(ii) The rate used by the insurer in the qualifying bid under which the plan administrator will purchase annuities not being paid as a lump sum. … (ii) The rate used by the insurer in the qualifying bid under which the plan administrator will purchase annuities not being paid as a lump sum....

Ferrari v. Vitamin Shoppe, Inc.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 31, 2022

The statements at issue here are all sufficiently narrow to qualify as structure/function claims. Cf. … The defendant has carried the narrow burden for substantiation that existing law has established. Cf.

Holloway v. Thompson Island Outward Bound Education Center Inc.

492 F. Supp. 2d 20 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 29, 2007

If temporal proximity is the only evidence establishing retaliation, the proximity must be “very close.” Clark County Sch. Dist. v. … Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 828-829 (statutes that protect an employee from retaliation do not “clothe the complainant with immunity for past and present inadequacies, unsatisfactory performance, and uncivil conduct in dealing with

Toomey Ex Rel. O'Connor Lumber Esop Participants Committee v. Jones

855 F. Supp. 19 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 24, 1994

That document states that PHA will “assume responsibility for keeping up with current laws and regulations in order to properly maintain the Plan on a qualified status for tax purposes. … To repeat, the record clearly reflects that PHA performed only ministerial tasks—however complex and involved—on behalf of the Plan and rendered advice only in regard to these services.

Bourassa v. Masscor Optical Industries

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 13, 2021

immunity doctrine. … Plaintiff is clearly offering these statements for the truth of the matter asserted.

Howell v. Middlesex Community College

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 20, 2022

Contrary to Howell’s suggestion, his attendance at some classes at a community college elsewhere did not automatically establish his eligibility for FSA at MCC. … In enacting 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 1982, 1985(3), or 1986, Congress did not override the Eleventh Amendment immunity of the states. See Henry v. Florida Bar, 701 Fed.

United States v. Doe

332 F. Supp. 930 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 4, 1971

Such institutional employees clearly have less impact upon legislation than personal staff members entrusted by the legislator himself with sensitive and confidential duties. … Brandhove, supra, the related doctrine of legislative immunity is applicable, though not absolutely, to officers and employees of legislative bodies. Dombrowski v.