Case law

Doe v. D'AGOSTINO

367 F. Supp. 2d 157 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 25, 2005

have established a genuine issue of material fact that D’Agostino’s alleged harassment constituted an invasion of Minor Plaintiffs bodily .integrity. … In her opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, D'Agostino argued that she was entitled to qualified immunity.

Hayes v. Town of Dalton

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 17, 2022

was "clearly established at the time."'" … "Courts may analyze either part of the [qualified immunity] test first." Castagna, 955 F.3d at 219. The plaintiff bears the "'heavy'" burden of demonstrating the clearly established inquiry. Lachance v.

United States v. Katin

109 F.R.D. 406 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 14, 1986

The forced production of such papers by the defendant would establish their existence and location, and thus clearly constitute a compelled testimonial act. … The government does not appear to have offered the defendant a grant of immunity, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 6002 , covering the implied authentication inherent in compelled compliance with a subpoena.

Lund v. Henderson

22 F. Supp. 3d 94 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 27, 2014

Similarly, genuine issues of material fact foreclose the entry of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. Moses v. … Mele, 711 F.3d 213, 216 (1st Cir.2013) ("Of course, if the success or failure of the qualified immunity defense turns on a question of fact that is unresolvable on the summary judgment record, summary judgment is improper

Megadance USA Corp. v. Knipp

623 F. Supp. 2d 146 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 8, 2009

Injunction, and to file (if they wished to do so) a motion to dismiss over the signature of an attorney qualified to appear in this court. … Moreover, the Supreme Court has clearly established that in franchisor/franchisee situations like the one before this court, the franchisee has deliberately affiliated with the forum state (the franchisor’s home state) such

Partelow v. Massachusetts

442 F. Supp. 2d 41 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 23, 2006

While the record clearly indicates that Plaintiff exercised his constitutional right to file grievances under established prison procedures, see Shabazz v. Cole, 69 F.Supp.2d 177, 197 (D.Mass.1999) (citing Colon v. … Defendants alternatively argue that Plaintiff's RA and ADA claims are barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity. Having concluded that Defendants did not violate Title II, the court need not reach this argument. 12 .

Mandel v. Town of Orleans

233 F. Supp. 2d 232 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 9, 2002

Sergeant Gould has asserted that his conduct is protected by qualified immunity. … Remaining for consideration by this court in this case, however, are questions regarding qualified immunity and related matters regarding the scope of appropriate declaratory and other equitable relief. VI.

Maroney v. Fiorentini

District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 18, 2023

In any event, the court’s finding “no impropriety” and, thus, no due process violation, concerning conduct analogous to the case at bar serves as clearly established law to warrant qualified immunity for the Mayor, as … The qualified immunity doctrine “shields officers from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Gonzalez v. Lexington Police Department

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 1, 2024

established rights, privileges or immunities guaranteed by the federal Constitution or laws of the United States.” … As the Supreme Court has noted: An official sued under § 1983 is entitled to qualified immunity unless it is shown that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was “clearly established

Fernandes v. Bouley

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 29, 2021

If the constitutional right and availability of supervisory liability in that context are both clearly established, then the qualified immunity inquiry reduces to a test of objective reasonableness. Id. … Qualified immunity.

O'HARA v. Menino

312 F. Supp. 2d 99 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 8, 2004

The Agawam Court clearly answered the precise question addressed in Maldonado and that is raised in this case. … The Court found that the Town had not established a qualifying work period. See Aga-wam, 350 F.3d at 291 .

Bush v. Acton-Boxborough Regional School District

District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 23, 2023

right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time.’” … “If either of the two prongs is not met—i.e., if the facts do not show a constitutional violation or the right in question was not clearly established—the officer is immune.

Bolduc v. Town of Webster

629 F. Supp. 2d 132 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 22, 2009

The (partially misquoted) language from Kelley is inapposite as it relates to qualified immunity, not a substantive due process violation. 23 . … Given the failure of plaintiff’s § 1983 theories on the stated grounds, the Court need not reach the issue of whether defendant Berger-on is entitled to qualified immunity. See, e.g., Pearson v.

In Re Relafen Antitrust Litigation

346 F. Supp. 2d 349 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 29, 2004

]” that an antitrust defendant is “entitled to Noerr immunity.” Id. at 63, 113 S.Ct. 1920 . … Farey-Jones, 359 F.3d 1066, 1079 (9th Cir.2004), Judge Lindsay’s findings were not clearly and convincingly of this sort.

The Jonas H. French

119 F. 462 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 12, 1902

“But the decisions establishing the immunity of the receiver’s possession of the property brought by him into a foreign jurisdiction refer solely to the attempted enforcement of demands that existed before the property was … And whether the libel in rem against the steamboat in the hands of the receivers is or is not considered as coming within the statute, it was clearly within the discretion of the circuit court to permit the libelants to establish

Moore v. Dalessio

332 F. Supp. 926 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 7, 1971

Discharge for conscientious objection is at the grace of the Secretary of the Army and the applicant bears the burden of clearly establishing that he meets the requirements provided by the Secretary * *. … First, by requiring that plaintiff “clearly establish” his conscientious objection, the Board applied too stringent a burden of proof.

Goode v. City of Boston

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 21, 2023

Officer Smith argues that the doctrines of qualified and common law immunity bar the Goodes’ statutory claims against him. … The former shields government officials from civil liability if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Pearson v.

Massachusetts Food Ass'n v. Sullivan

184 F.R.D. 217 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 6, 1999

Does § 15 Establish a Per Se Antitrust Violation? … Here, the remainder of § 15 is clearly severable.

Connectu LLC v. Zuckerberg

240 F.R.D. 34 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 28, 2006

Section 2033.220(b)(1) (2006) provides that: (b) Each answer shall: (1) Admit so much of the matter involved in the request as is true, either as expressed in the request itself or as reasonably and clearly qualified by the … responding party. *36 Section 2022.220(b) (1) plainly allows a responding party in his or her “answer” to “qualify” an answer so long as the answer is “reasonably and clearly” qualified.

Cavanaugh v. United States Government

640 F. Supp. 437 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 19, 1986

The burden for establishing this duty is upon the Cavanaughs. Feldstein v. E.E. O.C., 547 F. Supp. 97, 101 (D. … Mass. 1982) (to be entitled to mandamus relief, the plaintiff “has the burden of demonstrating each element clearly and indisputably”).