Case law

Schell v. Birnbaum

3 Mass. L. Rptr. 91 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Nov 28, 1994

Clearly, by the time Langan Grossman entered the case, the statute of limitations had run. … [G.L.c. 229] established procedures for the recovery of damages the substantive right to which is anchored in the common law. Id. at 71 .. .

Doe ex rel. Doe v. Nashoba Regional School District

20 Mass. L. Rptr. 131 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Oct 12, 2005

Public school authorities clearly have discretion in making decisions about whether to promote or keep behind the students in their schools. … If a plaintiff alleges harm resulting from the adoption of such a policy, the conduct of any of the municipal employees or officials involved in establishing the policy would be immune from liability under section 10(b).

Manter v. Abdelhad

32 Mass. L. Rptr. 709 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Nov 7, 2014

This rule cannot rationally be construed to mean that all otherwise immunized volunteers forfeit their immunity, and are fully susceptible to suit, any time that noneconomic losses are claimed. … The Church could, of course, qualify as a covered nonprofit organization without being a tax-exempt entity under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Mahoney v. Bors-Koefoed

11 Mass. L. Rptr. 608 · Massachusetts Superior Court · May 24, 2000

“If the moving party establishes the absence of a triable issue, the party opposing the motion must respond and allege specific facts which would establish the existence of a genuine issue of material fact in order to defeat … Bors-Koefoed clearly had a great deal of discretion over the treatment of his patients, including Nicholas. The record indicates that Dr.

Natal v. City of New Bedford

13 Mass. L. Rptr. 453 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Aug 6, 2001

Town of Chapel Hill, 161 F.3d 782, 789 (4th Cir. 1998) (concluding that where police officers were entitled to qualified immunity with respect to alleged Fourth Amendment violations because their use of force was objectively … The Plan also fails to qualify under the statute because the writer clearly relied upon information from other persons, and it was not shown that those persons had reported that information as business routine.

Lyman v. Weld

6 Mass. L. Rptr. 59 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Sep 12, 1996

established” constitutional right, and qualified immunity applies. … The Supreme Judicial Court has adopted the Harlow standard as the rule applicable to state officials’ assertions of qualified immunity under the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act, G.L.c. 12, §§11H-1II. Duarte v.

Reaves v. Correctional Medical Services

20 Mass. L. Rptr. 67 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Sep 17, 2005

The defendants’ failure to employ trained, licensed, qualified rehabilitation staff, and therapists. … The case law in the Commonwealth has clearly established that a claim brought under the MERA is limited to the employment context. Judge Hillman stated in McClure v. Town of East Brookfield, 9 Mass. L.

Kyle v. Commonwealth

2 Mass. L. Rptr. 241 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jun 10, 1994

While the Act explicitly exempts intentional torts from its ambit, G.L.c. 258, § 10(c), it covers claims arising out of ordinary or gross negligence “because such a claim qualifies as a negligent or wrongful act or omission … Where, however, the conduct at issue “involves . . . the carrying out of previously established policies or plans, such acts should be governed by the established standards of tort liability applicable to private individuals

Irvin v. McGee

1 Mass. L. Rptr. 201 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Sep 27, 1993

“An employee must be able to point to some clearly-defined and well-established public policy that is threatened by the employer’s action.” Id.; see Mello v. … Brandhove, 341 U.S. 367, 373 (1951) (noting the federal speech or debate provision reflected previous established state law principles), an examination of federal law illustrates that the scope of immunity granted legislators

Van Houtum v. Campos

11 Mass. L. Rptr. 513 · Massachusetts Superior Court · May 5, 2000

In such a situation, the Trust Fund cannot be said to have clearly waived its sovereign immunity. B. … This long-standing, judicially constructed principle of statutory construction requires a “clearly manifested legislative intent when immunity is to be waived.” ELM, supra at 78 .

Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Elm Medical Laboratories Inc.

2 Mass. Supp. 626 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Aug 11, 1981

Although Elm couches its allegations in terms of negligent gathering and processing of data, clearly the publication caused the harm. … immunity absent a clearly expressed intention to do so from Congress.

Beckett v. Jewish Cemetery Ass'n of Massachusetts, Inc.

23 Mass. L. Rptr. 520 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Feb 6, 2008

Accordingly, defendants must first establish that Beckett’s claims are based solely on JCAM’s Land Court suit. … This argument lacks merit because, as Gold himself points out in his motion, to qualify for immunity under G.L.c. 114, §1A, an individual must act in good faith.

Stagl v. City of Cambridge

2 Mass. L. Rptr. 300 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jun 21, 1994

“If the moving party establishes the absence of a triable issue, the party opposing the motion must respond and allege specific facts which would establish the existence of a genuine issue of material fact in order to defeat … [provides] immunity only for discretionary conduct that involves policy making or planning.” Id.

Torres v. Dubois

6 Mass. L. Rptr. 386 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Feb 15, 1997

The defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity . . .”) (Emphasis added). … Plaintiffs have not argued that other rights at issue were clearly established.

Johnson v. Cooke

17 Mass. L. Rptr. 541 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Mar 1, 2004

Lawrence contend that they qualify as “public employees” on the following grounds: (1) Mr. … Shufflebarger does clearly indicate that Dr. Lawrence was present in the operating room, though not to participate as a surgeon in the procedure. When asked why Dr. Lawrence’s name was listed, Dr.

Jah v. Naphcare, Inc.

32 Mass. L. Rptr. 584 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Mar 31, 2015

The Act also immunizes public employees from claims of gross negligence. See McNamara v. … Implicit in this duly is the obligation to select and supervise appropriate and qualified persons to administer such treatment. The Suffolk defendants argue that Mr.

Gamarra v. First Plastics Corp.

29 Mass. L. Rptr. 4 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Sep 12, 2011

Once the moving party “establishes the absence of a triable issue, the party opposing the motion must respond and allege specific facts which would establish the existence of a genuine issue of material fact.” … Based on the summary judgment record, it is not clear whether the agreement between Peak Staffing and First Plastics qualifies as an “employee leasing arrangement." 211 Code Mass. Regs. §111.03.

Williamson v. Bernstein

5 Mass. L. Rptr. 94 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Feb 20, 1996

Bernstein never informed plaintiff that he was not qualified to provide therapy or that the therapy sessions were beyond the scope of his teaching responsibilities. … Mullins did not establish a special relationship or a fiduciary relationship between colleges and students. To be sure, proof at trial may be difficult.

Hogan v. Byrne

30 Mass. L. Rptr. 2 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Aug 29, 2011

Of necessity, the plaintiff must overcome the Town’s immunity particularly as affirmed in G.L.c. 258, § 10(h) which provides in pertinent part that the MTCA does not apply to: any claim based upon the failure to establish … The facts of that case clearly demonstrate that the officer involved, a State Trooper, had engaged in misconduct and assaultive behavior while performing his duties as a State Trooper.

Cote-Whitacre v. Department of Public Health

18 Mass. L. Rptr. 190 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Aug 18, 2004

DISCUSSION Under the established test set forth in Packaging Industries Group, Inc. v. … be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.”