Case law

CALVIN CHANG v. TRIPADVISOR, LLC and Another

Massachusetts Superior Court · Jan 8, 2022

Therefore, Defendants here will only be entitled to immunity under the CDA at this stage of the litigation if it is apparent from Mr. … Defendants contend that none of the causes of action in the Complaint plead sufficient facts to establish their liability. Specifically, Defendants argue that Mr.

Doe v. McIntire

12 Mass. L. Rptr. 697 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Feb 2, 2001

Those who are not qualified aliens are not eligible for any federal public benefit, except limited short-term benefits such as emergency medical assistance, immunizations, and access to soup kitchens. 8 U.S.C. §§1611 . … Two years after Graham was decided, the Supreme Court declared: It is established, of course, that an alien is entitled to the shelter of the Equal Protection Clause ... In Graham v.

DeSouza v. OneWest Bank Group, LLC

31 Mass. L. Rptr. 538 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Mar 14, 2013

Massachusetts trust law establishes specific rights and responsibilities of trustees when they take property in trust. … Since a trustee is not the individual, he/she as trustee can be seen as immune from suit for acts and omissions undertaken by the individual.

Sheehan v. DuBois

1 Mass. L. Rptr. 124 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jun 22, 1993

Finally, to the extent that the claim for damages could lie against DuBois, qualified immunity is a personal defense even if plaintiff could establish that he was in fact denied credits due him. … Ct., February 19, 1992), it cannot be said that the denial of good time credits was in violation of plaintiffs clearly established rights. O’Malley, supra.

T.T. the Bear's Place, Inc. v. Rodriguez

2 Mass. L. Rptr. 1 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Feb 17, 1994

The defendants argue that plaintiffs civil rights claims should be dismissed because defendants have qualified immunity. … Massachusetts has adopted this federal standard of qualified immunity for actions brought pursuant to the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act. Duarte v. Healy, 405 Mass. 43, 46 (1989).

Archer ex rel. Maureen G. v. Dare Family Services, Inc.

14 Mass. L. Rptr. 375 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Feb 11, 2002

caregiver qualifies as an employee under the common law direction and control test. … DSS establishes and enforces the policies applicable to DARE and its mentor parents.

Litchfield v. Bayley

18 Mass. L. Rptr. 223 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Sep 9, 2004

Pappas, who also established his clinical schedule and responsibilities. The defendant had to attend meetings of the Department scheduled by Dr. Pappas. … Foley, as a board certified physician, is regarded as a highly trained specialist qualified to act, in other contexts, without supervision, direction or control, he did not act independently of the direction, supervision

Oropallo v. Brenner

25 Mass. L. Rptr. 147 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jan 14, 2009

Qualified Immunity Brenner first argues that this court should grant his motion for summaiy judgment because he enjoys qualified immunity, and is therefore immune from all three of Oropallo’s tort claims. … immunity for his discretionary actions.

Barnes v. General Tire & Rubber Co.

2 Mass. Supp. 423 · Massachusetts Superior Court · May 29, 1981

Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 (1947), articulates , a qualified immunity from discovery for the work product and mental impressions of a party’s attorney. … Braddick, 595 F2d 961, 967 (5th Cir. 1979). 4 Work prepared by INA at the request of the plaintiff’s counsel falls within the qualified immunity from discovery of Rule 26(b)(3).

Lombardo v. Town of Billerica

3 Mass. L. Rptr. 75 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Dec 5, 1994

If the governmental actor’s actions were prescribed by a statute, regulation or established agency practice, then there is no discretion. … [provides] immunity only for discretionary conduct that involves policy making or planning.” Id. at 141. “[G]overnmental immunity does not result automatically just because the governmental actor had discretion.

Alake v. City of Boston

1 Mass. L. Rptr. 380 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Nov 10, 1993

“If the moving party establishes that 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, at 141. “[GJovernmental immunity does not result automatically just because the governmental actor had discretion.

Boyes-Bogie v. Horvitz

14 Mass. L. Rptr. 208 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Oct 31, 2001

provide expert litigation support and testimony relating to the valuation of the RAI stock and Rogal’s 100% ownership interests in RAI and a related corporation. 1 Horvitz, a certified public accountant, had previously qualified … It is established that witnesses are immune from claims for defamation and that the absolute privilege extends to statements made in the institution or conduct of litigation or in conferences and other communications preliminary

Parzyck v. Dubois

7 Mass. L. Rptr. 517 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jul 21, 1997

. §1983 Claim The defendants move for dismissal of this claim on the grounds that they are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for any violations of the plaintiffs rights. … As the hearing officer was performing a discretionary function when he refused to view the videotape, he is protected from liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity. See Matthews v.

Ahmed v. Burns

12 Mass. L. Rptr. 191 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Sep 20, 2000

Although the RMLD is a governmental body which qualifies as a public employer under the Tort Claims Act, G.L.c. 258, it is nonetheless a distinct and independent entity from the town. See Middleborough v. … involve the implementation and execution of such governmental policy or planning [for which there would be no governmental immunity].

Hull v. Foley

17 Mass. L. Rptr. 187 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jan 15, 2004

Whether the Defendant Physician Is Immune from Liability for Negligence under the Tort Claims Act The Massachusetts Tort Claims Act, G.L.c. 258, represents a limited waiver of sovereign immunity with respect to certain agencies … The undisputed facts establish that Dr. Foley’s treatment of Ms.

DiLoreto v. Town of Winchester

14 Mass. L. Rptr. 31 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Oct 22, 2001

of discretion for which § 10(b) immunity is available. … But, when that conduct ‘involves rather 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 and entities

Resource Management Co. v. Huggins

25 Mass. L. Rptr. 337 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jul 16, 2008

If a clerk is not carrying out a judge’s directive, the clerk is entitled only to qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity In the alternative, Huggins argues that RMC’s claims are barred by the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act, G.L.c. 258, §2.

Craig Harrison and Barbara Ruchie, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority

Massachusetts Superior Court · Jul 22, 2020

Ct. 237 , 244 (2019) ("Whether a defendant has sovereign immunity raises questions of subject matter jurisdiction.").[2] It is now well established that the MBTA shares the Commonwealth's sovereign immunity. … Neither the independent contractor statute nor the MBTA's enabling act clearly and unequivocally waives the MBTA's sovereign immunity as to liability for allegedly misclassifying a worker as an independent contractor rather

E.F.Y Realty Corp. v. City of Lynn

12 Mass. L. Rptr. 320 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jun 26, 2000

The defendants claim they are entitled to qualified immunity because the alleged constitutional violation, failure to provide due process by failing to notify the owner and mortgagee before demolishing the building, was not … clearly established by the time of demolition.

McMillan v. Westport Insurance

19 Mass. L. Rptr. 55 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Dec 12, 2004

Id. 4 Some courts grant absolute immunity to opinion work product but only qualified immunity to ordinary work product where a party may overcome the privilege by a showing of substantial need. … Even those courts that are reluctant to grant absolute immunity to opinion work product state that discovery of such materials may be granted in only rare situations.