Case law

Richards Ex Rel. Richards v. Thurston

304 F. Supp. 449 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 6, 1969

Arguably, uniformity may have some substantive merit in such specialized training establishments where individual liberty may need to be weighed against other rational, legitimate objects of a peculiar applicability. … What the case clearly pointed out was that the principal had issued an ad hominem order based solely on what the lawyers would call his ipse dixit.

Norris v. Murphy

287 F. Supp. 2d 111 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 21, 2003

It is undisputed in this case that under federal law, Norris qualifies as a prevailing party despite having been awarded only nominal damages. … With the applicable rates established, the Court now turns to a review of the number of hours expended.

Samboy v. United States

738 F. Supp. 2d 190 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 3, 2010

As noted, the government clearly presented enough evidence for the Court to have found, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the substance at issue was indeed crack cocaine and to have sentenced Samboy accordingly. … With respect to his first claim, Samboy argues that DEA Agent Roberto and Auburn Police Officer McGinnis were not qualified to testify as experts.

Cox v. Massachusetts Department of Correction, et.al.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 31, 2018

To succeed on a claim under Title II of the ADA, a plaintiff must establish “(1) that he is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) that he was either excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of some … There is, accordingly, insufficient evidence to establish an Eighth Amendment violation.

Demarest v. Athol/Orange Community Television, Inc.

188 F. Supp. 2d 82 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 28, 2002

The only motive AOTV articulated in support of this policy lacked any sound basis and clearly established that the provision is not aimed at “an extremely important problem.” … See Bill Johnson’s Restaurants, 461 U.S. at 743, 103 S.Ct. 2161 ("Just as false statements are not immunized by the First Amendment right to freedom of speech, baseless litigation is not immunized by the First Amendment right

Griswold v. Driscoll

625 F. Supp. 2d 49 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 10, 2009

Public officials may not establish educational policies tailored to the tenets of a religious group. … As also described earlier, decisions concerning curriculum are a form of government speech which is generally immune from First Amendment scrutiny by the courts.

United States v. Pfizer, Inc.

9 F. Supp. 3d 34 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 26, 2014

Engaging in a scheme to defraud cannot immunize a fraudulent action from qui tam suits regarding related forms of fraud in perpetuity; what was once a hot trail of fraud must cool at some point. … Relators bear the burden of establishing jurisdiction. Id. .

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.

Spencer

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 30, 2026

immunity. … Qualified immunity is especially problematic to raise for the first time in a reply, as the posture prevents Spencer from responding, despite the burden for opposing qualified immunity falling on a plaintiff

Stanton v. Lighthouse Financial Services, Inc.

621 F. Supp. 2d 5 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 25, 2009

Because the instant case is clearly distinguishable and the plain text of the statute holds otherwise, I reject their argument. … The court held that this public policy exception was “as widely recognized and thoroughly established as is the rule itself.” Id. at 354 , 21 N.E.2d 967 . It is appropriate here, as well.

Yourga v. Trustees of the Smith Vocational and Agricultural High School

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 27, 2020

“A government official sued under § 1983 is entitled to qualified immunity unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … Courts assessing the applicability of qualified immunity engage in a two-step inquiry. Hunt v. Massi, 773 F.3d 361, 367 (1st Cir. 2014).

LaChance v. Northeast Publishing, Inc.

965 F. Supp. 177 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 21, 1997

Of course, the determination of whether an individual is qualified for a particular position must necessarily be made on a ease-by-case basis. … The Gardner-Denver Court clearly disagreed with the importance that the lower court assigned to the federal favoritism of arbitration. Id 10 .

Oxford Immunotec Ltd. v. Qiagen, Inc.

271 F. Supp. 3d 358 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 26, 2017

T cells, cells that’ mediate immune responses in the body, become “antigen-experienced” after they encounter a harmful peptide. … Once activated, the T cells release so-called cytokines, such as IFN-y, which act as chemical messengers in order to elicit a, full immune response.

Conley v. United States

332 F. Supp. 2d 302 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 18, 2004

Indeed, it was totality of the circumstances, corroborated by Conley’s own testimony, that established that Conley was that officer. … The government responds that the alleged “inconsistencies” are trivial and would clearly not have impacted the substantive case.

Mullane v. Chambers

349 F. Supp. 2d 190 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 22, 2004

The court also ruled that the vessel was damaged while in the Sheriffs care, but that the Mullanes failed to prove the amount of damages and that the Sheriffs Department was immune from damages. Id. at 117-118 . … The court made clear that “[ajetual notice differs from constructive notice, in that the latter is a legal inference from established facts.” Id.

Kahriman v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

115 F. Supp. 3d 153 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 14, 2015

accommodation to qualified employees. … Suders, 542 U.S. 129, 133 , 124 S.Ct. 2342 , 159 L.Ed.2d 204 (2004) (to establish constructive discharge, plaintiff “must show that the abusive work environment became so intolerable that her resignation qualified as a fitting

Leeds & Northrup Co. v. Doble Engineering Co.

37 F. Supp. 113 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 12, 1941

Respecting these differences the master finds,— “In both of Plaintiff’s sets, the 1935 set and the 1936 set, provision is made for rendering the measuring instruments immune to errors caused by extraneous electrostatic fields … But, it may be noted that a considerable portion of the opinion was devoted to a consideration of the second claim, in which the element was read into it in order to save it from the established rule that the function of

Bellone v. Southwick-Tolland Regional School District

915 F. Supp. 2d 187 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 14, 2013

to August 16th”; that Plaintiff “has made significant progress in the[ ] areas [of stress reduction methods and problem solving strategies] over the past three months and speaks of getting back to teaching, a career he clearly … As to the inferential approach, the First Circuit has adopted a modified version of the framework established in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v.

College Hill Properties, LLC v. City of Worcester ex rel. Department of Building & Zoning

135 F. Supp. 3d 10 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 2015

and (2) must suffice .to establish the affirmative defense with certitude.” … The individual Defendants also assert that that the claims against them must be dismissed on qüalifíed immunity grounds. Whether Plaintiffs’ Section 1983 Claims.

Kibbe v. DuBois

120 F. Supp. 2d 114 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 26, 2000

Doyle qualifies as “clearly established Federal law” for purposes of AEDPA’s “contrary to” analysis. 15 The Commonwealth argues that Doyle is not controlling because Kibbe waived his right to remain silent. … Like Doyle , the Charles rule also qualifies as “clearly established Federal law” amenable to AEDPA’s “contrary to” analysis. b. The Rule of Anderson v.