Case law

Brown v. Leahy

31 Mass. L. Rptr. 505 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Dec 3, 2013

The guiding provision of C. 269, Sec. 12E is clearly the 500 feet minimum distance requirement. … Count I seeks a declaratory judgment, ruling as a matter of law that the Plaintiffs’ Property qualifies as an outdoor target range within the meaning of G.L.c. 269, Sec. 12E(d), and that any person who uses this range for

Brown v. Accredited Home Lenders, Inc.

26 Mass. L. Rptr. 559 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Oct 20, 2009

When Brown informed Philip that she wanted to cancel the transaction, he falsely stated that she qualified for the mortgage and would lose her deposit if she canceled. … Cavanagh, 396 Mass. 836, 939 (1986) (dismissal appropriate where complaint clearly reveals existence of affirmative defense). Cf. Green v.

Suffolk Construction Co. v. Royal & Sunalliance Insurance

14 Mass. L. Rptr. 295 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jan 29, 2002

The court held that the phrase, “arising out of your work” triggers the insurance company’s duty to defend and indemnify the additional insured unless the policy is drafted “with qualifying language that expressly implements … Although Royal was free to redraft the policy so that it clearly demonstrated an intention to limit coverage, it did not.

Greece v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

3 Mass. L. Rptr. 89 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Nov 25, 1994

I conclude that the case law interpreting that statutory standard clearly supports the plaintiffs argument that, on the facts at bar, she is entitled to receive accidental disability retirement. In Adams v. … The test borrowed from Zerofski’s Case and applied in Adams to accidental disability retirement benefits did not establish a conjunctive standard.

Motta v. Reading Municipal Light Department

5 Mass. L. Rptr. 687 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Aug 12, 1996

Motta also alleges that RMLD was negligent in awarding the masonry subcontract to Major because Major was not qualified to do masonry work. At no time did Motta send a letter of presentment to the defendant. … G.L.c. 258 was enacted as an exception to the sovereign immunity doctrine, which precludes suits against the state, municipalities or their agencies without their consent.

Hutchins v. Commonwealth

15 Mass. L. Rptr. 657 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Feb 10, 2003

The commitment scheme established by the version of c. 123A in existence in 1985 allowed for a 60-day evaluation period during which examinations were to be performed either prior to sentencing for the offense upon which … If such report clearly indicates that such prisoner is a sexually dangerous person, the clerk shall thereupon notify the court and the district attorney, and the district attorney shall file a petition for commitment of the

Adam Associates International, Inc. v. William A. Berry & Son, Inc.

22 Mass. L. Rptr. 389 · Massachusetts Superior Court · May 2, 2007

The arbitrator(s) shall be selected in accordance with the AAA procedures from a list of qualified persons maintained by the AAA. … An arbitrator cannot direct a person to act in violation of the law and thereby immunize that person from the consequences of his illegal conduct.

Bernardi v. Marks

8 Mass. L. Rptr. 32 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jan 9, 1998

Once the moving party establishes the absence of a triable issue, the party opposing the motion must respond and allege specific facts establishing the existence of a genuine issue of material fact. … The undisputed facts here establish that the defendants had no duly to the plaintiff to maintain the leased premises.

Brelin-Penney v. Encore Images, Inc.

27 Mass. L. Rptr. 254 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jun 1, 2010

To establish a claim for employment discrimination on the basis of handicap, the plaintiff must demonstrate “that [he] was terminated, that [he] is ‘handicapped,’ that [he] is a ‘qualified handicapped person,’ and that he … In consequence, in order for Scott to establish that he is a “qualified handicap person," he must present evidence that he would have been able to perform his duties with a “reasonable accommodation.”

Doherty v. Director of the Office of Medicaid

31 Mass. L. Rptr. 369 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Aug 14, 2013

Doherty (“Doherty”) and her husband established the William A. Doherty and Muriel S. Doherty Family Trust. … Chapter 118E of the General Laws and Chapter 130 of the Code of Regulations clearly define the “area of concern” of the Commonwealth’s MassHealth Medicaid program.

Dolph v. Vitale, Caturano & Co.

19 Mass. L. Rptr. 660 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jul 5, 2005

Dolph was neither being asked to do something which was clearly unlawful nor was he being penalized because he refused to break the law. … Because this Court has already concluded that this would not violate any well established public policy, it necessarily follows that this alleged motive is not improper.

LaSalvia v. Johnson

15 Mass. L. Rptr. 622 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jan 21, 2003

McDonough, the plaintiffs’ expert, qualified to opine as to the standard of care in 1992, the court finds that Dr. … McDonough was qualified to offer his medical opinion as to the applicable standard of care in 1992. Dr.

Martinez v. Umass Memorial Health Care, Inc.

21 Mass. L. Rptr. 103 · Massachusetts Superior Court · May 12, 2006

on June 12, 2002. 2 Brown now moves for summary judgment (and entry of separate and final judgment), on the ground that, on October 27, 1998, he was a public employee of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and as such, is immune … Clearly, the fact that Brown was a Resident presents a factual issue that would not have been relevant had he been a physician engaged in private practice.

Zoppo v. Foster

6 Mass. L. Rptr. 543 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Apr 22, 1997

Laws §9-33-2 (1993) (requires plaintiff to establish that defendant’s petition or free speech constitutes a “sham”); Minn. … These are the traditional means for achieving judgment prior to trial, and the Legislature clearly wanted to lessen the defendant’s burden at this stage.

Born v. Simonds International, Corp.

26 Mass. L. Rptr. 416 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Dec 30, 2009

Further, the deponent’s testimony from which this line is taken clearly states that the subsidiary “managed its money.” … Plaintiff alleged that the fire was the result of maintenance work performed by untrained employees not qualified to undertake the repairs. The refinery was owned and operated by a subsidiary of the defendant.

Commonwealth v. Can-Port Amusement Corp.

19 Mass. L. Rptr. 211 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Apr 7, 2005

In short with the exception of the exposure of genitalia, no “longstanding judicial interpretation [of G.L.c. 272, §16] clearly conveys ‘sufficiently definite warning as to the proscribed conduct’ ” Commonwealth v. … By killing or damaging cells of the body’s immune system, HIV progressively destroys the body’s ability to fight infections and certain cancers.

Blair v. O'Leary

10 Mass. L. Rptr. 106 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Feb 4, 1999

Clearly, this process accords with the statute. … results in such employee occupying a position in a different title from the title of the position from which he was separated such placement right shall be subject to the completion by such employee of a retraining program established

Daniel L. Golden v. Middlesex County District Attorney's Office

Massachusetts Superior Court · Mar 4, 2025

All responsive records not qualifying for a PRL exemption were to be turned over to Mr. Golden forthwith. … To be blunt, the Middlesex DA did not remotely approach its burden of establishing that the ordered index or, by implication, the documents withheld were broadly entitled to the investigative exemption claimed, G.L. c. 4,

New London County Mutual Insurance v. Matthews

10 Mass. L. Rptr. 126 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jan 22, 1999

If the moving party establishes the absence of a triable issue, in order to defeat the motion for summary judgment, the opposing party must respond and allege specific facts which would establish the existence of material … These two factors, in and of themselves, clearly lead to the determination that Matthews was indeed a resident of the Marino household.

Frost v. TGI Friday's Inc.

14 Mass. L. Rptr. 395 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Dec 6, 2001

Massachusetts recognizes a cause of action for wrongful termination of an at-will employee only where the facts show violation of a clearly established public policy, such as where the employee is terminated for “asserting … There is room for argument as to whether an assertion regarding the effect of a regulatory provision, such as appears in paragraph six of the complaint, qualifies as an allegation of fact for this purpose, as well as whether