Case law

In Re Number Nine Visual Technology Corp. Securities Litigation

51 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 1, 1999

The Defendants also argue that the "bespeaks caution" doctrine should immunize the claims regarding inventory in the Prospectus. … The sufficiency of existing restructuring reserves seems clearly to be a subject of internal projection.

Adams v. Mass General Brigham Incorporated

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 10, 2021

To establish a claim for failure to reasonably accommodate, “a plaintiff must produce sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find that (1) he was disabled within the meaning of the ADA, (2) he was a qualified individual … One of the claimed impairments was an “immune system disability” stemming from chemical sensitives and allergies. Id.

In Re Monarch Capital Corp.

173 B.R. 31 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 5, 1994

Moreover, if the "clearly erroneous" standard were to apply, a bankruptcy court would be possessed of the power to enforce all of its own determinations immune from any meaningful review by an Art. III court. … Finally, the Omega Equipment Corp. court asserts that the bankruptcy court's determinations are immune from meaningful review.

Institut Pasteur v. Cambridge Biotech Corp. (In Re Cambridge Biotech Corp.)

212 B.R. 10 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 15, 1997

“Antigenic” proteins (“antigens”) like pl8 are proteins that cause an immune response in the body, i.e. cause antibodies to be produced. … See 35 U.S.C. § 282 (stating that a patent is presumed valid and the burden of establishing invalidity rests on the party asserting it).

Monarch Life Insurance v. Ropes & Gray

173 B.R. 31 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 5, 1994

Moreover, if the “clearly erroneous” standard were to apply, a bankruptcy court would be possessed of the power to enforce all of its own determinations immune from any meaningful review by an Art. Ill court. … Finally, the Omega Equipment Corp. court asserts that the bankruptcy court’s determinations are immune from meaningful review.

Gore v. Trustees of Deerfield Academy

385 F. Supp. 2d 65 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 27, 2005

The pages Plaintiff cites, however, are clearly preliminary to the handbook itself and make no mention of changes to either of the provisions currently at issue. … Generally, to establish a prima fa-cie case of retaliation under either Title VII or the ADA, a plaintiff must prove that (1) she engaged in protected conduct, (2) she suffered an adverse employment action and (3) a causal

Adams v. Mass General Brigham Incorporated

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 12, 2021

To establish a claim for failure to reasonably accommodate, “a plaintiff must produce sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find that (1) he was disabled within the meaning of the ADA, (2) he was a qualified individual … One of the claimed impairments was an “immune system disability” stemming from chemical sensitives and allergies. Id.

United States v. Frabizio

445 F. Supp. 2d 152 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 11, 2006

This degree of precision is insufficient to qualify as expertise when a defendant’s liberty is at stake. … It is the Court’s duty, however, to ensure that the jury hears only qualified expert testimony. See Ruiz-Troche v.

United States v. Jones

762 F. Supp. 2d 270 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 30, 2010

The evidence against Jones consisted of a blurry video where the suspect’s face is not clearly visible, Telford’s identification of Jones from the same video, and Patterson’s identification of Jones from a single photograph … True, the probation officer, as a Court employed neutral, applies some filter to this data but, while this is an aid to the Court, it hardly qualifies as fact-finding.

United States v. Roberson

684 F. Supp. 2d 179 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 16, 2010

First, the government must file an information to establish the prior conviction. Id. § 851(a). … Trial counsel clearly was not constitutionally ineffective for failing to make such a meritless argument.

Lamkin v. Braniff Airlines, Inc.

853 F. Supp. 30 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 26, 1994

Chapdelaine, the expert offered by the plaintiff, by self-acknowledgement is not qualified to testify as to the cause of the accident. … There the court stated as follows: Since plaintiffs clearly intended to purchase hot coffee and since coffee is customarily served and intended to be consumed as a hot beverage, plaintiffs must present evidentiary facts establishing

Blair v. M/V BLUE SPRUCE

315 F. Supp. 555 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 23, 1970

Under Massachusetts law plaintiff clearly has a lien against the vessel for his services. … Indeed, the reasonable inference is that State statutes conferring liens on certain items were superseded because federal law now established liens for the identical items.

Bey v. Tufts

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 11, 2024

Bey contends that he was arrested and “was clearly being held to answer for an alleged crime by state trooper Tufts without a presentment or indictment of a grand jury and [he] was deprived of [his] liberty and property … To establish that an arrest lacked probable cause, the plaintiff must show that the police officers acted unreasonably in arresting him. Holder, 585 F.3d at 504.

Gillette Co. v. Norelco Consumer Products Co.

946 F. Supp. 115 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 27, 1996

a defense immunizing a manufacturer from liability for false advertising claims. … Insofar as its closeness claim is concerned, Norelco has specifically qualified the claim in its advertisements, with a notation about the acclimation period.

In re Credit Suisse-AOL Securities Litigation

253 F.R.D. 17 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 26, 2008

Indeed, plaintiffs claims in this case do not present a novel legal theory, but rather a novel application of an already established theory. … Moreover, plaintiff has satisfied the Court that it took sufficient care in choosing counsel and discussing a fee arrangement and that counsel is sufficiently qualified and experienced to conduct the litigation.

Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Black & Decker Corp.

383 F. Supp. 2d 200 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 25, 2004

The “deemer” clause clearly states that cessation of exposure, not substantial cleanup, is the event that triggers the policy. … Connor would qualify as an expert witness.

Cotter v. City of Boston

193 F. Supp. 2d 323 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 21, 2002

Clearly it was not, otherwise this litigation would never have taken place. … The promotion decisions elevated three qualified officers to the rank of sergeant at the expense of ten officers, including the Plaintiffs, who, although qualified, had no right or entitlement to be promoted.

United States v. Mueffelman

400 F. Supp. 2d 368 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 14, 2005

While CCFC explained many of the risks of the program in its promotional materials, it clearly left out critical facts. … Nor is fraudulent intent established by evidence that a person made a mistake of judgment or an error in management or was careless.” 17 .

Zenon v. Guzman

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 8, 2018

The Supreme Court has established a two-prong test to determine whether an act is “judicial” for purposes of establishing immunity. … Under this line of authority, Defendant is clearly immune from suit in this court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

United States v. Dray

659 F. Supp. 1426 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 5, 1987

I have considered his testimony with caution and weighed it with great care given his status as a convicted perjurer who appeared before me as an immunized accomplice witness pursuant to a plea agreement with the prosecution … This is because the reason for finding the other potential coconspirators not culpable would clearly be failure of proof in a single proceeding.