Case law

Niarchos v. City of Beverly

831 F. Supp. 2d 423 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 26, 2011

When the Shorewood police temporarily took Jonathan into custody, he was clearly not a pre-trial detainee. Id. Similarly, in Schoenfield v. … Laws ch. 258, § 10 (j), which seems to immunize the municipality from liability.

McGrath v. City of Somerville

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 2019

That is, the only overtime pay the plaintiffs would have received would qualify as overtime under the FLSA and thus be excluded from regular wage calculations. … Immunity from Prejudgment Interest The City further contends that it is immune from prejudgment interest on plaintiffs’ state- law claims under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 231.

Lu

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 5, 2026

Eleventh Amendment Immunity As an initial matter, Plaintiff’s retroactive damages claims are barred under sovereign immunity. … For example, the regulations define “licensing applicants” broadly as “[a]n otherwise qualified individual who has applied for a license and is being screened for criminal history by a governmental licensing agency.” 803

United States v. Worcester

190 F. Supp. 548 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 25, 1961

Yet this secret aspect of the grand jury was not fully established until after the reign of Charles II. … See The Immunity Act of 1954, 18 U.S.C. § 3486 (c), upheld in Ullmann v.

Roman Catholic Bishop v. City of Springfield

760 F. Supp. 2d 172 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 4, 2011

The map clearly delineates the boundaries of the district, which, indeed, encompasses only the Our Lady of Hope Church. … The First Amendment clearly prohibits government from engaging in the “establishment of religion.” U.S. Const. Amend. I. What constitutes an establishment of religion is less clear.

Rauseo v. Army Corps of Engineers

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 26, 2019

A waiver of sovereign immunity must be unequivocal and Sections 505(a)(2) and 1449(a) of the CWA and the SDWA explicitly waive sovereign immunity with respect to nondiscretionary … It is clearly established, however, that an agency’s decision not to prosecute or take enforcement action is “generally committed to an agency’s absolute discretion”. Heckler v.

United States v. 434 Main Street, Tewksbury, Massachusetts

961 F. Supp. 2d 298 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 24, 2013

To establish Mr. … If that testimony is credible, the property should clearly be forfeited.

King v. LONG BEACH MORTGAGE COMPANY

672 F. Supp. 2d 238 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 9, 2009

Further, being an assignee of the FDIC does not give Chase any special immunity from section 1641(c). … TILA requires that creditors “clearly and conspicuously” disclose the consumer’s right to rescind. 15 U.S.C. § 1635 (a).

Miranda Pizarro v. McDonald

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 25, 2024

Under that statute, the court must dismiss an action to the extent that, among other things, it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted or seeks monetary damages from a party that is immune. … P. 10(c), exhibits are not required and the use of exhibits does not excuse Miranda-Pizarro of his responsibility to clearly and succinctly set forth the relevant allegations in the body of the second amended complaint

In re Wilcox

94 F. 84 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 29, 1899

This statute, while re-establishing the right of the petitioning joint creditor to receive a dividend out of the separate estate equally with the separate creditors, would seem clearly to abolish the other exception to the … to general equity, and then to limit and qualify it by a number of arbitrary exceptions, in order to meet the particular equities of particular cases.

Ferreira v. Duval

887 F. Supp. 374 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 12, 1995

It is well established that the due process clause entitles prisoners to “adequate law libraries or adequate assistance from persons trained in the law.” Bounds v. … The Court does not address the issue of qualified immunity which was not raised by defendants.

Cornelius v. Minter

395 F. Supp. 616 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 20, 1974

It is clear *621 that while the states have wide latitude in designing their particular programs, there are certain immutable requirements which they must meet to qualify for federal money and to maintain this eligibility … Clearly, welfare recipients’ needs are as crucial on a continuing basis as they are at the time of initial processing. Adens v.

Martin v. Janey

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 2, 2021

Third, Martin’s claims against Boston Housing Court Judge MaryLou Muirhead appears barred by the doctrine of absolute judicial immunity. … It is well-established that adjudicatory functions are entitled to absolute judicial immunity. Zenon v. Guzman, 924 F.3d 611, 616 (1st Cir. 2019).

O'Connell v. Gross

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 10, 2020

Furthermore, the complaint fails to implicate either of the exceptions to that immunity. It is well-settled law that the “enactment of § 1983 did not abrogate the Eleventh Amendment immunity of the states.” … Gen Laws ch. 29, § 2LLL (establishing Firearms Fingerprint Identity Verification Trust Fund to support state police background check system).

Smith v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Inc.

597 F. Supp. 2d 214 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 12, 2009

, all services must be (1) “[ejssential to improve [the participant’s] health outcome and as beneficial as any established alternatives covered by this contract”; (2) “[a]s cost effective as any established alternatives”; … The Plan clearly covers only treatments that are “medically necessary” and “[f]urnished in the least intensive type of setting required.” 35 During the review process, three licensed physicians conducted separate reviews

Roberts

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 10, 2026

The case caption of any amended complaint should clearly name each party she intends to sue. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a). … If 1 To establish diversity jurisdiction, plaintiff must assert that the parties are citizens of different states, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1), and that the amount in controversy in this action exceeds $75,000. 28 U.S.C.

United States v. Alves

688 F. Supp. 70 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 25, 1988

The parole commission, established within the executive branch, could establish the release date and, thereby, the length of the sentence. … This tension is nowhere posited so clearly as it is in this matter where Congress has focused on the entrenched problem of disparate sentencing in the federal courts.

Brilmyer v. University of Chicago

431 F. Supp. 2d 154 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 5, 2006

As noted, the Insurance Certificate states clearly that a change in enrollment is not effective until “TIAA approves your proof of good health.” … This alone does not establish a conflict of interest.

United States v. Barletta

500 F. Supp. 739 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 3, 1980

In such a case, § 3731 clearly would give the government the right of appeal. … What the government really seeks here is to establish a precedent that would grant to the U.S.

Learning Express, Inc. v. Ray-Matt Enterprises, Inc.

74 F. Supp. 2d 79 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 12, 1999

“[F]alse statements of opinion, of conditions to exist in the future, or of matters promissory in nature,” however, do not qualify as representations of material fact. See Yerid v. … Opp.Mem. at 12, the Counterclaim clearly attempts to state an independent private right of action for violation of the statute and the Court thus granted the motion to dismiss Count IV. 5 G.