Case law

Supreme Council of Royal Arcanum v. State Tax Commission

358 Mass. 111 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jul 3, 1970

Superintendent of Schs. of Cambridge, 320 Mass. 516, 518 ) requisite to establish an “actual controversy” on this issue. See G. L. c. 231A, § 1. … [fraternal benefit societies] unless they are expressly designated therein . . .,” when read in context, clearly refers only to insurance laws.

Ward v. Coletti

383 Mass. 99 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 5, 1981

This procedure of applying for immunization was available by the terms of the Resolve creating the Commission. … recommend to the general court supplementary budgets which shall be subject to the same procedure as the original budget.” 5 The Justices said, 308 Mass, at 614-615: “Indeed, the language of art. 63 of the Amendments — as clearly

Rotondi v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

463 Mass. 644 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 29, 2012

We find no reason to distinguish between forms of compensation that qualify for the purposes of calculating an individual’s retirement allowance, and forms of compensation that qualify in satisfying a minimum eligibility … In order to qualify as “regular compensation,” payments must be “ ‘recurrent,’ ‘regular,’ and ‘ordinary’ remuneration.” Bulger v.

Commonwealth v. Lavery

188 Mass. 13 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Apr 4, 1905

properly his license shall be revoked, clearly contemplates a careful selection of the person to whom such a privilege is granted. … It thus becomes personal in its nature, and is not capable of being transferred by the licensee, nor does the license furnish immunity from prosecution to another who seeks to avail himself of its benefit as if it had been

Commonwealth v. DePina

476 Mass. 614 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 13, 2017

Immunized witness testimony. … See also Pontes, supra at 314, quoting Bruton, supra at 128 n.3 (statements must be "clearly inadmissible" against codefendant).

Kobrin v. Gastfriend

443 Mass. 327 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jan 20, 2005

Massachusetts law recognizing such absolute immunity accords with well-established law across the country. See Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325, 330-334 (1983), and cases cited; Blevins v. … With specific reference to the board, it is also an extremely modest modification of the earlier statute that gave qualified immunity to persons filing complaints, reporting or providing information, “or assisting the board

City of Revere v. Massachusetts Gaming Commission

476 Mass. 591 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 10, 2017

Although § 17 (g) precludes ordinary modes of judicial review and thereby qualifies, for purposes of G. … Generally, orders denying motions to dismiss based on immunity from suit satisfy both criteria. Shapiro, 464 Mass. at 264–265, and cases cited.

Commonwealth v. Bin

480 Mass. 665 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 9, 2018

He argues that a "[company] representative or other qualified individual needed to explain those records to the jury. The person used by the Commonwealth . . . was not so qualified. … The judge concluded that the trooper was qualified as an expert in the area of CSLI.

Kimball v. Post Publishing Co.

199 Mass. 248 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jun 15, 1908

. *252 Bell, 7 Gray, 301 , that this statement, unqualified, is too broad, still subsequent decisions seem to show clearly that in England the principle of privilege is confined to reports of judicial or quasi judicial bodies … The difficulty of separating the damages gives no immunity to the defendants. Exceptions sustained.

Commonwealth v. Foxworth

473 Mass. 149 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 12, 2015

Where the  8 ultimate conclusion is clearly evident from the record, the failure to make written findings is not fatal. See Commonwealth v. … Instruction on immunized witness. Campbell testified pursuant to a grant of immunity. The judge instructed the jury that the defendant could not be convicted solely on the testimony of an immunized witness.

Dinsky v. Town of Framingham

386 Mass. 801 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jul 20, 1982

In addressing this issue, we start with the basic principle that the abrogation of the doctrine of governmental immunity by the Act simply removed the defense of immunity in certain tort actions against the Commonwealth, … The court considered the fact that statutory provisions removing the defense of governmental immunity had been enacted but found that the provisions merely removed the defense of immunity without creating any new liability

Santana v. Registrars of Voters of Worcester

384 Mass. 487 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 1, 1981

“The object of election laws is to secure the rights of duly qualified electors, and not to defeat them.’ … Clearly our conclusion that the plaintiffs in this case have stated a claim sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss disposes of the judge’s holding that the complaint presented no “actual controversy.”

Pheasant Ridge Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Town of Burlington

399 Mass. 771 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Apr 30, 1987

Burlington had low or moderate income housing in such limited amounts as to qualify land in the town for treatment under G. L. c. 40B, § 21. See G. L. c. 40B, § 20. … We decline now to decide whether under § 11I we will adopt a rule of qualified good faith immunity for public officials. 12 See Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982).

Commonwealth v. Adrey

376 Mass. 747 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Dec 4, 1978

The evidence against the defendant consisted primarily in the testimony of Roy Weisenborn and Robert Burns, each of whom was granted immunity in exchange for testifying. … Leach, 160 Mass. 542, 551 (1894), where we first clearly stated the principle.

Electronics Corp. of America v. City Council of Cambridge

348 Mass. 563 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Feb 25, 1965

L. c. 121, § 26YY (as appearing in St. 1955, c. 654, § 4); A redevelopment authority “shall have the same functions, rights, powers, privileges and immunities” as a housing authority. G. … Such a study is clearly within its jurisdiction. *568 As was said in St. Luke’s Hosp. v.

Commonwealth v. O'Connell

438 Mass. 658 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Feb 12, 2003

The judge clearly and emphatically instructed the jury that Mr. … O’Connell’s signature was clearly erroneous because she had witnessed his signature only once, and ordinarily that is not sufficient to qualify a person to be sufficiently familiar with a person’s handwriting for purposes

Commonwealth v. Andrews

403 Mass. 441 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 29, 1988

The evidence was clearly relevant to the issue of the credibility of Dawn Squires. There was no error. c. … Judgments affirmed. 2 Carol Sylvester had been granted immunity from prosecution. See G.

Jewett v. Steer

60 Mass. 99 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 15, 1850

It is maintained, however, that as the last clause describes the premises granted as having been owned and occupied by Tufts, and as he did not own and occupy the Williams lot, that lot must, upon the established rales of … The whole description must be taken together; the first clause clearly and distinctly describes the premises granted as all the farm and outlands then occupied by Wheaton; thus clearly and unquestionably including the Williams

Maddocks v. Ricker

403 Mass. 592 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Dec 15, 1988

(“[W]e conclude that orders disqualifying counsel in civil cases, as a class, are not suffficently separable from the merits to qualify for interlocutory appeal”). … The plaintiffs’ challenge to the allowance of Gove’s motion for judgment is clearly an attempted appeal of an unreviewable, interlocutory order that concerns an aspect of the underlying dispute.

Howell v. THE ENTERPRISE PUBLISHING COMPANY, LLC.

455 Mass. 641 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jan 7, 2010

The Enterprise published articles on August 25, September 17, and September 19 that included mentions of Howell’s case, and because they touch on official proceedings, we have established that these articles can qualify for … Sack, Defamation § 7.3.2.2.1, at 7-17 (3d ed. 2009) (describing privilege as qualified but generally stronger than other qualified privileges).