Case law

Watman v. Groman (In Re Watman)

331 B.R. 502 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 27, 2005

In light of Watman’s status as sole officer, shareholder, and director of Childrens Dental, Childrens Dental clearly qualifies as an ‘insider’ of Watman for purposes of § 727(a)(7), and Watman does not argue otherwise.” … This finding is not clearly erroneous.

Slattery v. Town of Framingham

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 9, 2020

, and (2) that the remaining speech at issue was protected, the court need not address Chief Ferguson and Acting Chief Trask’s qualified immunity defenses. … Under Massachusetts law, immunity is afforded to discretionary functions, which “includes determinations made by executives or administrators in establishing plans, specifications or schedules of operations.

Rogers v. Okin

638 F. Supp. 934 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 27, 1986

The essence of plaintiffs’ claim was that they should not be forcibly medicated or secluded, except in clearly defined emergencies. … The various factors to be considered in establishing the lodestar fee are set forth in King v. Greenblatt, 560 F.2d 1024, 1026-27 (1st Cir.1977). 1.

Guckenberger v. Boston University

974 F. Supp. 106 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 15, 1997

. § 794 (West Supp. 1997), and state law. 2 The class claims that BU discriminates against the learning-disabled by: (1) establishing unreasonable, overly- burdensome eligibility criteria for qualifying as a disabled student … Dist., 63 F.3d 131, 138 (2d Cir.1995) (finding that “[i]t is enough for the plaintiff to suggest the existence of a plausible accommodation, the costs of which, facially, do not clearly exceed its benefits”).

Kosilek v. Spencer

889 F. Supp. 2d 190 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 4, 2012

Dennehy clearly communicated to Lappin her opposition to providing Kosilek sex reassign *225 ment surgery. … The evidence on the record clearly establishes that both Dr. Appelbaum and Dennehy were aware of facts from which they could infer that a substantial risk of serious harm to Kosilek existed, and drew the inference.

Yanovitch v. United States

985 F. Supp. 17 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 29, 1997

The facts below were established at trial: Following an altercation occurring outside a bar in South Boston, Yanovitch fired several pistol shots at Robert Viens, wounding him twice. … Yanovitch’s case is therefore easily distinguishable from Indelicato , as Yanovitch’s predicate offense was 1) clearly a Massachusetts felony that, 2) caused him to lose his core civil right to serve on a jury at the time

In Re Air Crash Disaster at Boston, Massachusetts on July 31, 1973

399 F. Supp. 1106 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 21, 1975

This is clearly the view of the Second Circuit. … To the extent that Hausman may be read, as it is by Delta, to indicate that where there is a clearly enunciated state rule, automatic adherence to it by federal courts is required, Hausman is contrary to the established position

Morgovsky v. Department of Homeland Security

517 F. Supp. 2d 581 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 18, 2007

Here, in the absence of a clearly established duty to act on a naturalization petition within a prescribed period of time, the court agrees with those of its sister courts that have held that the MVA attaches only in the … The court understands the crush of applications which CIS must process and the efforts it must exert to insure that only those who are truly qualified are naturalized as citizens. Still there are outer limits.

Manarolakis v. Coomey

416 F. Supp. 532 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 28, 1976

Plaintiff Georgios Manarolakis contends that his marriage to co-plaintiff Katherine Dean Manarolakis qualifies him for adjustment to the status of alien relative. The Government contends, first, that since Mr. … It is clearly within the authority of the I.N.S. to make inquiry into the marriage to the extent necessary to determine whether it was entered into for the purpose of evading the immigration laws. Bark v.

GSI Lumonics, Inc. v. Biodiscovery, Inc.

112 F. Supp. 2d 99 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 25, 2000

An agency relationship is evident, and Shams is not immune from jurisdictional reach merely by virtue of his use of agents. 2. … Under this approach, a mailed notice of infringement in the context described clearly would satisfy the statutory prerequisite. Id. at 195-96.

Vecinos De Barrio Uno v. City of Holyoke

960 F. Supp. 515 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 18, 1997

A schedule at the conclusion of the memo established the timeline for supplemental discovery and further evidentiary proceedings. … In other words, there were telltale signs aplenty, and this court should have made that point more clearly.

Gentile v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance

951 F. Supp. 284 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 8, 1997

If the moving party demonstrates that there is “an absence of evidence to support the non-moving party’s case,” the burden shifts to the non-moving party to establish the existence of a genuine issue of material fact. … The first paragraph contains the phrase “as determined by the company” in its description of the kind of incapacity which qualifies as total disability.

Krohn v. United States

578 F. Supp. 1441 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 4, 1983

Defendants claim that federal officials are entitled to absolute immunity from suit for all common law torts. Although this assertion is obviously over-broad, see Bishop v. … Tice, 622 F.2d 349 (8th Cir.1980), federal law enforcement officers are entitled to absolute immunity from suit for false imprisonment.

United States v. Flemmi

108 F. Supp. 2d 39 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 5, 2000

It still did not disclose that Shields had been immunized and compelled to testify or the existence of John Doe 2 . Id. … element of the offense of conviction.’ ” Carrozza, 4 F.3d at 77 (quoting U.S.S.G. § 2E1.1). “ ‘[Underlying racketeering activity,’ ... means simply any act, whether or not charged against [a] defendant personally, that qualifies

Modell v. Eliot Savings Bank

139 F.R.D. 17 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 16, 1991

Thereafter, the news flowing from the Bank could generally be described as bad. 3 Clearly the May 19th announcement would put future investors on notice that things were not well with the Bank. … Additionally, Modell’s status as a sophisticated investor renders him neither devoid of the protection of the securities laws nor immune to injury by misrepresentation. Priest v. Zayre Corp., 118 F.R.D. at 555 .

Kotler v. American Tobacco Co.

685 F. Supp. 15 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 25, 1988

Generally, retroactive operation will not be given to a statute unless the act clearly, by express and unequivocal language or necessary implication, indicates that the legislature intended a retroactive application. … Applicability of statutes of limitations in tobacco liability actions usually involves questions of fact for a jury, and American Tobacco will bear the burden of establishing as a matter of law that the challenged claims

Doran v. Massachusetts Turnpike Authority

256 F. Supp. 2d 48 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 24, 2003

The second question is whether the regulation affirmatively or clearly discriminates against interstate commerce on its face or in its “practical effect.” Id. … Dec.23, 2002) (noting that policies charged as discriminatory under the Privileges and Immunities Clause are valid when there is a “substantial reason” for them and less restrictive means are unavailable).

In re Volkswagen & Audi Warranty Extension Litigation

273 F.R.D. 349 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 24, 2011

Accordingly, this court finds that Co-Lead Counsel are qualified and experienced and that they ably represented the Class. … wished to be excluded from the Settlement Class were given an opportunity to do so by mailing a written Request for Exclusion to the OSSA, in accordance with the Agreement and postmarked no later than February 3, 2011, clearly

Anversa v. Partners Healthcare System, Inc.

116 F. Supp. 3d 22 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 28, 2015

The institution must complete its inquiry “within 60 calendar days of its initiation unless circumstances clearly warrant a longer period.” Id. § 93.307(g). … [b]ut where Congress has not clearly required exhaustion, sound judicial discretion governs”) (citations omitted). . Plaintiffs rely on Hettinga v.

Mercado v. Department of Social Services

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 15, 2023

Additionally, the Court explained that the defendant social worker and attorney are immune from suit for damages in their official capacities; the defendant agency has immunity … Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11 (1991) (per curiam ) (“[J]udicial immunity is an immunity from suit, not just from the ultimate assessment of damage.”).