Case law

Conservation Law Foundation of New England, Inc. v. Clark

590 F. Supp. 1467 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 27, 1984

Section 552(a)(1) qualifies the *1476 publication requirement as follows: “Except to the extent that a person has actual and timely notice of the terms thereof, a person may not in any manner be required to resort to, or … E.O. 11644 directs that specific ORV zones be established on applicable federal lands.

In Re Columbia University Patent Litigation

343 F. Supp. 2d 35 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 5, 2004

Therefore, in a patent case a plaintiff seeking a declaratory judgment generally must prove two essential elements to establish that an actual case or controversy exists. … This conclusion is not qualified by the fact that it is conceivable, although not likely, that claims now in the ’275 patent could be included if a T59 patent is ever issued because the application for it is based on the

Gill v. JetBlue Airways Corp.

836 F. Supp. 2d 33 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 14, 2011

The holdings of these cases, however, are clearly limited to claims arising from the kinds of in-flight hazards subject to FAA safety regulations. … ACAA regulations establish no specific requirements as to the manner in which such services must be provided.

Andrews-Clarke v. Lucent Technologies, Inc.

157 F. Supp. 2d 93 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 27, 2001

After reviewing the factual allegations of the complaint in detail, the District Court (by Young, J.) allowed the motions to dismiss, but clearly was outraged by the ruling. … Clearly AT & T could have been named as a defendant in the first suit (assuming, arguendo, that it was not).

Dusel v. Factory Mutual Insurance Company

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 14, 2021

Here, the evidence at issue qualifies as after-acquired evidence. … In arguing for summary judgment, Dusel clearly misinterprets the elements of a claim of unjust enrichment.

Martinez v. Spaulding

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 2022

Additionally, the judge found that Petitioner qualified as a career offender due to two prior predicate felony convictions, which resulted in an adjusted base offense level of 37. Id. … BOP’s Program Statement, however, clearly indicates that a conviction is not required and that BOP administrators may rely on information in official documents, such as a PSR, that clearly indicates prohibited sexual conduct

Digital Equipment Corp. v. Parker

487 F. Supp. 1104 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 2, 1980

The invocation of 37 CFR § 1.56 (d), with respect to this application is thus clearly contemplated and surely permitted by USPTO regulations. … Clearly, demeanor evidence is not required to make such a finding.

United States v. West

552 F. Supp. 2d 74 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 7, 2008

established advisory guidelines range. 127 S.Ct. at 2463-65. … Second, West’s conduct and criminal history — while clearly warranting a lengthy period of incarceration— did not merit what could amount to a life sentence for a thirty-eight year-old man.

Atlantic Fish Spotters Ass'n. v. Evans

206 F. Supp. 2d 81 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 22, 2002

“[T]his [Act]” clearly includes the entirety of the appropriations bill containing section 634. … The meaning of the term “Act” in this appropriations measure clearly stands for the legislation in its entirety.

Keane, Inc. v. Swenson

81 F. Supp. 2d 250 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 13, 2000

Subsequently, Keane announced a 3-for-2 stock dividend, and Swenson qualified for an additional 500 shares of Class B common stock on July 21, 1986. … Instead, the nonmov-ing party must adduce specific, provable facts which establish that there is a triable issue. See id.

Ortega v. United States Customs and Border Protection

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 23, 2023

Those claims are clearly barred by sovereign immunity. What remains are the claims for declaratory and injunctive relief. … Defendants contend that those claims are barred by sovereign immunity. To the extent that plaintiffs seek money damages, the Court agrees.

Ferguson v. General Star Indemnity Co.

582 F. Supp. 2d 91 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 18, 2008

The Duty to Defend The principles to be applied in determining whether General Star had a duty to defend are well-established and oft-quoted. … Also, as the trial judge in the malpractice litigation found, it is not certain that the estate would have qualified for the payment deferment. (PI. Ex. 3 at 4-5).

Stuart v. City of Gloucester

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 2021

immunity. … Accordingly, Plaintiff has also satisfied his burden to establish a prima facie case under the MWPA, and the burden now shifts to the City.

Rudy v. Marchilli

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 17, 2018

Rudy may not obtain federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) unless he can show that the SJC’s decision “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined … When making the “unreasonable application” inquiry, federal habeas courts must determine “whether the state court’s application of clearly established federal law was objectively unreasonable.” Id. at 409.

Sanchez v. Silva

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 15, 2018

Ct. 429, 431 (2014) (emphasizing that “circuit precedent does not constitute ‘clearly established Federal law’” for these purposes); see also Bebo v. Medeiros, 906 F.3d 129 (1st Cir. 2018). … When making the “unreasonable application” inquiry, federal habeas courts must determine “whether the state court’s application of clearly established federal law was objectively unreasonable.” Id. at 409.

Wollman v. Massachusetts General Hospital Inc.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 29, 2020

immunity provided by this subdivision.” … Here, the Report was sent to the Chair of the Board under an email clearly marked privileged and the Report is clearly marked privileged. There is no evidence or allegation that Ms.

Quiles v. Sikorsky Aircraft

84 F. Supp. 2d 154 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 8, 1999

Plaintiff also asserts that Potts’ statements are inadmissible because he has not been qualified as an expert to give an opinion as to the source of the cracking. … I find that defendants have established all three Boyle requirements.

Softub, Inc. v. Mundial, Inc.

53 F. Supp. 3d 235 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 2014

a contract for sale although the writings of the parties do not otherwise establish a contract. … First, the witness must be shown to be sufficiently qualified by “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.” Fed.R.Evid. 702.

Southern States Police Benevolent Ass'n v. First Choice Armor & Equipment, Inc.

241 F.R.D. 85 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 9, 2007

The additional Named Plaintiffs, Ohio state troopers Dennis Wilcox and George King and the Lowell, Massachusetts Police Department, clearly meet the typicality requirements. … Specifically, it requires a demonstration that 1) there exists no conflict between the interests of the Named Plaintiffs and the class members and 2) counsel chosen by the Named Plaintiffs are qualified and able to litigate

United States v. Arnone

973 F. Supp. 206 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 15, 1997

Bribes clearly involve a quid pro quo exchange. United States v. Mariano, 983 F.2d 1150, 1159 (1st Cir.1993). Kickbacks according to the defendants, also require some form of quid pro quo exchange. United States v. … One example from the current guideline may be instructive: ... if a bank officer agreed to the offer of a $25,000 bribe to approve a $250,000 loan under terms for which the applicant would not otherwise qualify, the court