Case law

Commonwealth v. Burgos

470 Mass. 133 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 21, 2014

The victim in this case was clearly killed as a result of multiple gunshot wounds. … The judge also concluded that the search warrant was supported by probable cause because the Commonwealth had established the informant Almeida’s basis of knowledge and veracity.

Roberts v. Southwick

415 Mass. 465 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jun 9, 1993

If the testimony would not aid the jury because it was clearly within common knowledge, then it may be properly excluded. E.g., Thomas v. … The handling of sheetrock is not a matter clearly within common knowledge. The exclusion of the OSHA regulations and the expert's testimony was not harmless error.

Alpert v. Commonwealth

357 Mass. 306 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Apr 27, 1970

“established was an inaccurate and unfair base fine because the unstable soils beneath it allowed a seepage of the gravel down through it.” … The situations, however, are clearly different.

Commonwealth v. Wardsworth

482 Mass. 454 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jun 19, 2019

As the prosecutor *674 urged in closing, "Clearly, ... Daughtry wanted to distance himself from the defendant." … We note first that Merced was properly qualified as an expert. See Mass. G.

Commonwealth v. Williams

481 Mass. 443 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Feb 13, 2019

However, we do not consider the arguments for structural error waived because the defendant makes clear that he is analogizing to two well-established types of structural error -- denied peremptory challenges and Soares violations … But the record does not clearly identify which question the judge was referring to when he said that the prospective juror "hesitated quite a bit" and "really struggled with it."

Commonwealth v. Ellis

432 Mass. 746 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Dec 6, 2000

In her testimony at each of the three trials, her estimates were imprecise, and most were qualified by words such as “guessing,” “[rjoughly,” and “[sjomewhere around there.” … Defense counsel established that Sanchez had identified two different photographs as her stalker (one at the police station, another at the suppression hearing).

Commonwealth v. Vitello

367 Mass. 224 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Apr 1, 1975

Nash was not sufficiently qualified as an expert in spectrogram comparison analysis. … In order to ensure centralization, the lines of responsibility must be clearly drawn.

Earle v. De Witt

88 Mass. 520 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 15, 1863

The contract, the payment of the money, the mistake and its materiality and controlling influence, and the failure of consideration, are all clearly established. … It is also recognized as the established law in the case of Kerr v. Kitchen, 7 Barr, 486. And in Dorsey v.

Attorney General v. Commissioner of Insurance

442 Mass. 793 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 16, 2004

[W]e decline the bureau’s clearly implied invitation to compare both models in light of all the evidence and to select the one we decide is better. … Set against the Attorney General’s extensive evidence on this issue, 16 Scott’s opinions hardly qualify as “substantial evidence” supporting the commissioner’s decision, a decision which is apparently premised on a finding

Silva v. Rent-A-Center, Inc.

454 Mass. 667 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 10, 2009

Under that original definition, a bona fide lease terminable at the option of the consumer, such as Costa’s agreement, would not qualify as an “installment sale agreement.” … For a lease to qualify as a “retail installment sale agreement” it must satisfy both definitional requirements.

Commonwealth v. Billingslea

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Apr 30, 2020

Ct. 124, 126 (1976) ("Ordinarily, statutes which were in effect prior to the establishment of [the Appeals Court, see G. … One hundred percent."  46 or that the finding was clearly erroneous'" (citations omitted). Commonwealth v.

Commonwealth v. Keo

467 Mass. 25 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jan 21, 2014

‘establish the position of the United States and not merely the views of its agents who participate therein’ ”). See ante at 40. … The Williams court stated, “We hold only that when an attorney is permitted to state alternative or inconsistent defenses on behalf of his or her client, the statement does not qualify as the admission of a party opponent

Rogers v. Commissioner of the Department of Mental Health

390 Mass. 489 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 29, 1983

The statutes and regulations are clearly intended to set forth the exclusive means for use of chemical restraints, which include antipsychotic drugs. Use of the word “only” in G. … [when the doctor makes] the effort to establish a strong therapeutic alliance.” Id. 19 Economic considerations may also create conflicts between doctors and patients.

Medbury v. Watson

47 Mass. 246 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 15, 1843

The present case is clearly distinguishable from that, and is supported by the authority of Patten v. Gurney, 17 Mass. 182 . … But even this is qualified by one of .the more ancient decisions : As where a vendor had falsely affirmed as to the amount for which the estate rented, and had induced a person to give a higher price for the estate in consequence

Commonwealth v. Long

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 17, 2020

Thus, the Commonwealth clearly failed to rebut the reasonable inference of impermissible discrimination raised by the defendant, and the denial of the motion to suppress must be reversed.20 f. … Commissioner of Correction, 448 Mass. 412, 419 (2007) (qualified immunity standard asks  18 Sullivan, 340 Ark. 315, 318 (2000), cert. granted, judgment

Hochberg v. Proctor

441 Mass. 403 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Apr 6, 2004

conclusively define the phrase “bearing the name” in the context of a will or trust instrument. 12 Guidance may be found, however, in decisions of this court using that language to refer to circumstances where a testator clearly … Because there was no way to predict in 1949, nor was it certain to be known, within the applicable perpetuities period, which of the above contingent beneficiaries, if indeed any at all, would ultimately qualify to take the

Cote-Whitacre v. Department of Public Health

446 Mass. 350 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 30, 2006

The plaintiff couples make no claim that they are a suspect class entitled to heightened scrutiny, except insofar as they are nonresidents entitled to the protections of the privileges and immunities clause provisions of … There is no dispute that the list of impediments issued during the relevant time clearly indicated that the couples were prohibited *393 from marrying under the laws of their home State (New York and Rhode Island), and thus

Commonwealth v. Niemic

472 Mass. 665 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 17, 2015

The clear premise of the prosecutor's argument is that the defendant's testimony, because he was the defendant and on trial, did not even qualify as evidence because it was inherently incredible. … The judge erred by his use of the permissive words "may" and "should"4 when discussing use of excessive force in self-defense, rather than the clearly directive "must." See Commonwealth v.

Opinion of the Justices to the Senate

372 Mass. 883 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · May 31, 1977

rendered less important the former claim that “it is important that [the defendant] should have a jury ... of his neighbours, who know him and who know the witnesses, and whose means of information and habits of thinking qualify … Reorganization of an existing system or department of government does not necessarily require abolition of prevailing offices; in fact, generally that is an unusual procedure, and the intent to wipe out the old structure must be clearly

Bruce Johnson v. Caroline Settino

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 8, 2024

Thus, overturning a prior decision must be undertaken with great care, requiring us to consider "the quality of [its] reasoning, [and] the workability of the rule it established" (citation omitted). Knick v. … Holmes, 195 Mass. 495, 505 (1907) (gift of bond was "subject to a qualified reservation of the interest" in donor); Barry v. Barry, 2 Mass. App.