Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,281 results
1.16s
5 F. Cas. 508 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 15, 1870
This is not a libel by a stevedore for stowing a vessel, but of a cook demanding extra wages for work done on board the vessel beyond the limits of his original contract, and not so sharply distinguished from it that he is … Lindo v. Rodney, 2 Doug. 613 , note.
Cited 1 timesPublished225 F. 685 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 15, 1914
The accident did not occur on board her. … The steamer apparently had nothing to do with the ties until they were put on board her by the stevedore.
Cited 0 timesPublishedA.F.M. Corp. v. Corporate Aircraft Management
626 F. Supp. 1533 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 26, 1985
Nei v. Burley, 388 Mass. 307 , 446 N.E.2d 674, 679 (1983). … See Bratt v.
Cited 13 timesPublishedAttleboro Mfg. Co. v. Frankfort Marine, Accident & Plate Glass Ins.
202 F. 293 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 29, 1913
BROWN, District Judge. … Co. v. Kane, 170 U. S. 100 , 18 Sup. Ct. 526, 42 L.
Cited 3 timesPublishedTimur Fishing Corp. v. Cap'n Bill, Inc.
160 F. Supp. 563 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 14, 1958
Anglo-Saxon Petroleum Co., Limited, of London, England v. United States, D.C.D.Mass., 88 F.Supp. 158 ; but cf. The T. J. Hooper, 2 Cir., 60 F.2d 737 , cer-tiorari denied Eastern Transp. Co. v. … On board the Cap’n Bill no one was acting. The Cap’n Bill was sounding no fog signals, and even if I accept the testimony of the Mary & Julia to the full, hers were quite inadequate.
Cited 1 timesPublishedCardillo v. Attorney General of United States
2 Mass. Supp. 612 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 31, 1981
As established in Board of Regents v. … See, Sellars v. Procunier, 641 F.2d 1295, 1301-1302 (9th Cir. 1981) (parole board members entitled to absolute immunity in 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983 actions); DeShields v. U.S.
Cited 0 timesPublishedConsalvo Trucking, Inc. v. Excavating & Building Material Chauffeurs & Helpers Local Union No. 379
201 F. Supp. 684 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 19, 1962
Local 1976, United Brotherhood of Carpenters v. National Labor Relations Board, 357 U.S. 93 , 78 S.Ct. 1011 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1186 (1958). … National Labor Relations Board v. Bangor Building Trades Council, 278 F.2d 287 (C.A. 1, 1960). 15.
Cited 1 timesPublished182 F. 179 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 23, 1909
Davenport, a passenger on board the ferryboat, and by her husband, Vernon B. Davenport. … Co. v. Transp. Co., 204 U. S. 220 ; 27 Sup. Ct. 246, 51 L. Ed. 450 .
Cited 3 timesPublishedFayard v. NORTHEAST VEHICLE SERVICES, LLC
490 F. Supp. 2d 134 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 13, 2007
Co. v. … The ICCTA not only sets forth procedures governing the Surface Transportation Board’s regulation of rail carriers, but also provides remedies for violations of Board orders and the statute itself.
Cited 1 timesPublishedIn re Pharmaceutical Industry Average Wholesale Price Litigation
277 F.R.D. 52 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 30, 2011
Denney v. … United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 751 v. Brown Group, Inc., 517 U.S. 544, 553 , 116 S.Ct. 1529 , 134 L.Ed.2d 758 (1996) (quoting Hunt v.
Cited 4 timesPublished798 F. Supp. 2d 310 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 21, 2011
Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 2846 , 180 L.Ed.2d 796 (2011). … McIntyre Mach., Ltd. v.
Cited 5 timesPublished1 F.2d 1004 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 1924
Co. v. Mellon, 262 U. S. 100 , 43 S. Ct. 504 , 67 L. Ed. 894 , 27 A. L. R. 1306, concerning supplies of liquor which they customarily carried for use on board. Under these circumstances the treaty was negotiated. … Co. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co., 204 U. S. 427, 436, 437 , 27 S. Ct. 350 , 51 L. Ed. 553 , 9 Ann. Cas. 1075. The construction of it is a judicial question. Jones v. Meehan, 175 U. S. 1 , at page 32, 20 S. Ct. 1 , 44 L.
Cited 0 timesPublishedKiley v. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance
159 F. Supp. 3d 135 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 27, 2016
If a disagreement about the amount of loss has been referred to a board of referees within two years of the date of loss, any action against us must be started within 90 days after the board’s decision. … Moran v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 7 Mass.App.Ct. 822 , 390 N.E.2d 1139 (1979); see also Molea v. Aetna Ins.
Cited 3 timesPublishedSecurities & Exchange Commission v. Pinez
989 F. Supp. 325 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 16, 1997
Comm’n v. … Comm’n v.
Cited 8 timesPublishedFreedom Wireless, Inc. v. Boston Communications Group, Inc.
198 F. Supp. 2d 11 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 16, 2002
In Decca Ltd. v. … The court in Decca borrowed its analysis from a Patent Office Board of Interference decision called Rosen v. NASA, 152 U.S.P.Q. 757 , 768 (BNA 1966).
Cited 2 timesPublished497 F. Supp. 116 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 24, 1980
Brown and Jane Brown were denied eligibility because of a purchase of an automobile (an exempt item) on May 22, 1979. Their claim must also be DISMISSED as moot. 106 C.M.R. 325 .060(C) (1979). … In Rosado v.
Cited 9 timesPublished295 F. 358 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 28, 1923
Ever since White’s Bank v. Smith, 7 Wall. 646 , 19 L. … S. § 4192, as interpreted by the court in White’s Bank v.
Cited 14 timesPublished850 F. Supp. 2d 317 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 7, 2011
Adams v. … Hannigan v.
Cited 3 timesPublished93 F. 643 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 24, 1899
Smith v. Mason, 14 Wall. 419 ; Marshall v. Knox, 16 Wall. 551 ; Knight v. Cheney, Fed. Cas. No. 7,883; In re Evans, 1 Low. 525 , Fed. Cas. No. 4,551. … But see Knight v. Cheney, Fed. Cas. No. 7,883. The title of Cornelius Brodbine is not derived from the bankrupt, but immediately from the licensing board.
Cited 5 timesPublished216 F. Supp. 3d 217 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 3, 2016
See Scheck v. … See Vining v. Astrue, 720 F.Supp.2d 126, 137 (D. Me. 2010) (“The figure of 11,000 jobs nationwide is in line with what courts have held to be a ‘significant’ number for purposes of [the] Step 5 analysis”); Brown v.
Cited 27 timesPublished
Ask Donna