Case law

In re Neurontin Marketing & Sale Practices Litigation

244 F.R.D. 89 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 29, 2007

Defendants do not identify any conflicts of interest between the proposed representatives and the class, nor do they contest that plaintiffs’ experienced and highly-qualified counsel are adequate. … means of dispensing with proof of individual injury under Rule 23”) (citing In re Hotel Charges, 500 F.2d 86, 89-90 (9th Cir.1974) (“Such enlargement or modification of substantive statutory rights by procedural devices is clearly

Mandeville v. Gaffney

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 6, 2023

The parties disputed whether Mains, which established a thirty-day time limit for a prisoner’s filing of an SJC gatekeeper petition following denial of a motion for a new trial, applied to such denials occurring before … Claim (A) for “Ineffective Assistance of Counsel” and its antecedents in Mandeville’s SJC petitions do not “clearly indicate the nature of [his] defense attorney’s prejudicial conduct.” United States v.

Duke v. Community Health Connections, Inc.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 11, 2019

Discussion Courts do not have jurisdiction over claims against the federal government, except where the government has expressly waived its immunity. See United States v. … For this reason, we have reversed dismissals where the applicability of the equitable tolling doctrine depended upon factual questions not clearly resolved in the pleadings.

In RE McKESSON GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES

767 F. Supp. 2d 263 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 4, 2011

Typically, the publishing company played no independent role in establishing AWP, other than applying this formulaic markup to the manufacturer's price. 2. … Hartman's damages methodology includes programs that use Red Book instead of FDB, this is not a persuasive argument for denying class certification, because the definition of each proposed class clearly excludes public payors

Barrigas v. United States of America

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 9, 2018

“‘As with all waivers of sovereign immunity,’ the FTCA must be strictly construed in favor of the government.” Gordo-Gonzalez v. United States, 873 F.3d 32, 35 (1st Cir. 2017) (quoting Bolduc v. … “Conduct qualifies as extreme and outrageous only if it ‘go[es] beyond all possible bounds of decency, and [is] regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.’” Id. (quoting Roman v.

Iconics, Inc. v. Massaro

266 F. Supp. 3d 449 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 19, 2017

To establish misappropriation of trade secrets under Massachusetts law, a plaintiff must show “1) the information is a trade secret; 2) the plaintiff took reasonable steps to preserve .the secrecy of the information; and … Although it can be “understandably difficult when describing complex scientific concepts” to speak both clearly and with particularity, Alnylam Pharm., Inc. v. Dicerna Pharm., Inc., No.

Calhoun v. United States

539 F. Supp. 2d 500 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 25, 2008

In order for a plaintiff to bring a malpractice action, she must first establish the existence of a physician-patient relationship. Coombes v. Florio, 450 Mass. 182, 186 , 877 N.E.2d 567 (2007). … While the court accepted the letter de bene it clearly is inadmissible as hearsay (on several levels).

First Security Bank of Utah, N.A. v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.

43 F. Supp. 2d 136 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 15, 1999

Section 8.6 established a floor below which the number of remaining hours and cycles of operation on an Engine’s disks could not fall. … Finally, even if the Engine Parts were replaced pursuant to implied authorization conferred under Section 8.2, they would still seem to qualify as “replacement Parts” within the meaning of Section 7.2.2.

FWK Holdings LLC v. Shire PLC (Direct Purchaser Antitrust Class Action Complaint)

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 9, 2020

Such testimony is clearly permissible. … The Court finds that the testimony is admissible for the purpose of establishing that there was not a no-AG agreement within the Shire-Actavis settlement.

Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc.

339 F. Supp. 2d 202 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 15, 2004

This argument alone fails to establish this defense. … This ambiguity, however, does not establish HMR/TKT’s point.

Gomes v. Silva

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 20, 2019

A state-court decision is “contrary to” clearly established federal law if it (1) “applies a rule that contradicts the governing law set forth in [the Supreme Court’s] cases” or (2) resolves a case differently from the … Because it clearly was not, relief will not be granted as to that ground. IV.

Ratchford v. Orange Lantern, Inc.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 13, 2024

Maronick has a doctorate degree in marketing, decades of teaching at the graduate and undergraduate level, and extensive experience conducting marketing research, all of which suffice to establish that he is qualified to … Plaintiffs who were earning their living by promoting their image, likeness, or identity when their images were posted to Magic Lantern’s Facebook page clearly had a commercial interest in their reputations and sales such

Picone v. Shire U.S. Inc. (Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Class Action)

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 9, 2020

Such testimony is clearly permissible. … The Court finds that the testimony is admissible for the purpose of establishing that there was not a no-AG agreement within the Shire-Actavis settlement.

Snyder v. Contracted Medical for the DOC

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 7, 2020

review the amended complaint and dismiss if the court determines that it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … However, the amended complaint, as plead, does not clearly set forth allegations sufficient to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, Inc. v. United States Department of Education

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 30, 2018

“A document is predecisional if the agency can: ‘(1) pinpoint the specific agency decision to which the document correlates, (2) establish that its author prepared the document for the purpose of assisting the agency official … The Pedersen Declaration and Supplemental Pedersen Declaration do not clearly indicate that the emails “formed an essential link”in the process of creating a FAQ or responding to a borrower, nor do they state that the

Flag Fables, Inc. v. Jean Ann's Country Flags & Crafts, Inc.

730 F. Supp. 1165 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 16, 1990

Second, if “copying” is established, a court “must determine whether the copying is sufficiently substantial to constitute ‘unlawful appropriation.’ ” Id. … In this Court’s view, a flag or banner does qualify as a useful article in and of itself, as it may function as a flag even in the absence of any design. 8 The defendants may argue, and rightly so, that the bulk of a flag

Yerardi v. Pacific Indemnity Co.

436 F. Supp. 2d 223 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 29, 2006

Yerardi is not entitled to coverage in any event because she has not established her innocence. … Yerardi has failed to establish her innocence as a matter of law.

United States v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 27, 2023

Remuneration The first issue is whether the donations by Regeneron to CDF qualify as “remuneration” under the AKS. … At a minimum, the language clearly suggests that there must be a causal relationship of some kind between the AKS violation and the medical decision that resulted in the false claim.

Douglas v. EF Institute for Cultural Exchange, Inc.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 22, 2021

Both cases clearly “relate to” the price or service provided by a direct or indirect air carrier, and neither involve a claim, as in the present case, unrelated to price, route or service, nonetheless being preempted by … May 4, 2018) (explaining that “[v]iolations of state regulations that constitute per se unfair or deceptive practices under Chapter 93A do not, without more, establish injury under Chapter 93A”).

Espinosa Sr. v. Andrew C. Metcalf

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 25, 2022

Such allegations encompass MCO and Abelli, see id. at 1 (defining “Defendants”), and, therefore, establish a reasonable inference that MCO and Abelli are liable for violating Section 1692e as to Senior. … Accordingly, MCO and Abelli plausibly qualify as “creditor[s]” and may be liable under Chapters 93 and 93A. F.