Case law

Jenkins v. City of Taunton

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 8, 2018

After surveying the clearly established law in the context of these and other facts in the record construed in plaintiff’s favor, this court found that such law “would have given a reasonable … Finally, although mindful that qualified immunity is an immunity from suit as well as monetary damages, the denial of qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage does not foreclose

Russell v. Cooley Dickinson Hospital, Inc.

437 Mass. 443 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Aug 8, 2002

To establish a prima facie case for employment discrimination on the basis of handicap, the plaintiff must show that she was terminated, that she is “handicapped,” that she is a “qualified handicapped person,” and that she … The defendants argue and the judge concluded that the plaintiff cannot establish that she is a qualified handicapped person because at all relevant times she was collecting disability benefits on the basis of being “temporarily

Mauri v. Zoning Board of Appeals

83 Mass. App. Ct. 336 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Feb 22, 2013

LLC), clearly establishes that abutters raising unrefuted issues related to overcrowding have standing to challenge further construction in an already overly dense zoning district. See Dwyer v. Gallo, 73 Mass. App. … Although espoused in terms of privacy concerns, the deposition testimony of Maureen Mauri clearly indicates that she is aggrieved by construction of a dwelling which she contends violates the density provisions of the zoning

Halsey v. McLean

94 Mass. 438 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 15, 1866

The principles by which we must be controlled are sufficiently well established. … The construction given to this provision by the courts of New York clearly establishes its qualified and penal character in their opinion. And we regard their construction as conclusive upon us.

Penate v. Kaczmarek

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 17, 2022

“[O]fficers are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’” … In this court’s view, the focus of the qualified immunity analysis for purposes of determining whether Plaintiff had a clearly established Brady right to have Defendant turn over the ServiceNet Diary Card should be on

Donovan v. Pangallo

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 20, 2023

Defendant argues, in the alternative, that even if he violated the Donovans’ constitutional rights, the rights were not clearly established, and he is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. Def.’s Mem. 10 [Doc. … Even if they had, qualified immunity would bar the claims. The Verified Complaint [Doc.

O'CONNELL v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corp.

544 F. Supp. 2d 51 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 7, 2008

The affidavits and attached exhibits clearly establish a plausible federal contractor defense. The analysis required by the first and second elements of the Boyle defense are closely tied. … The Sargent Affidavit is relevant to establishing the historical pervasiveness of Navy control over all aspects of shipbuilding contracts. 8 Considered together, the affidavits reasonably establish that the specifications

Oberg v. City of Taunton

972 F. Supp. 2d 174 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 25, 2013

Because Defendants do not address their qualified immunity argument to the First Amendment political discrimination claim, the issue is not before this court. See Mem. Supp. Mot. Dismiss. [# 22], 25-28. . Mem. Opp. Mot. … Because Count Five is subject to dismissal on other grounds, this court need not consider whether Defendants are shielded by qualified immunity. . Chemlen v.

Ryan v. McCullough

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 24, 2025

right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.” … Nor is McCullough entitled to qualified immunity as to this claim as “[i]t is clearly established law that the Fourth Amendment requires that arrests be based upon probable cause.” Martínez- Rodríguez v.

First Natl. Bank of Boston v. First Natl. Bank Boston

375 Mass. 121 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Apr 27, 1978

For the reasons discussed below, we conclude that, in Article Eighth, Crockett clearly expressed an intent to obtain the maximum allowable marital deduction. As we pointed out in Putnam v. … Additionally, the trust established under Article *125 Eighth was designed to qualify for the marital deduction under I.R.C. § 2056. 5 A contrary intent is not to be found on examination of the will.

Freedman v. Ali

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 14, 2018

Qualified immunity is a defense that a public official may assert against claims “from personal liability for actions taken while performing discretionary functions.” Barton v. … The qualified immunity analysis requires a court to decide ‘(1) whether the facts alleged or shown by the plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) if so, whether the right was ‘clearly established

Dulgarian v. Stone

420 Mass. 843 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jul 24, 1995

Each statement was a true fact, a nonprovable as false fact or an opinion, clearly identified as such, based on disclosed nondefamatory facts. … Summary judgment was proper because the plaintiffs could not establish that the defendants’ conduct arose from improper motives or involved improper means.

Commonwealth v. Rezendes

88 Mass. App. Ct. 369 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Sep 17, 2015

5 qualify as a predicate offense to support a conviction as an armed career criminal under G. … qualify as both a dangerous and a deadly weapon.

American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. IMR Capital Corp.

888 F. Supp. 221 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 10, 1995

Has Massachusetts Clearly Articulated a Policy? … I agree with NET that its tariffed rates, which are the product of an extensive investigation and review by the DPU, express a clearly articulated and actively supervised state policy, and are therefore immune from antitrust

Harlow v. Thomas

32 Mass. 66 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 15, 1833

The reference to the deed from Bent to the defendant was for the purpose of description, to identify the land conveyed and to distinguish it from other adjoining land of the defendant, and not to limit or qualify the title … The plaintiff having established his right to recover, it only remains to inquire what shall be the measure of damages. The' general rule in cases of this kind, is plain and undisputed.

Blaisdell v. Commonwealth

372 Mass. 753 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jun 14, 1977

In order for the privilege to apply, at least two factors need be established. … Since the protection afforded a defendant by way of immunity must be coextensive in scope with that afforded by the privilege, statements short of confessions of guilt *763 must also be immunized lest they become a “link

Santana v. Registrars of Voters of Worcester

398 Mass. 862 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Dec 31, 1986

The judge’s finding was not clearly erroneous. *866 B. Constitutional violation cognizable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1976). … The finding was not clearly erroneous. In this State, as in most jurisdictions, recovery for emotional distress is limited.

Moe v. Secretary of Administration & Finance

382 Mass. 629 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Feb 18, 1981

Certain minimum requirements must be met, however, to qualify for Federal aid. … The plaintiffs clearly allege that the challenged restriction will prevent them from obtaining abortions.

Tramontozzi v. Watertown School Committee

2 Mass. L. Rptr. 190 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jun 9, 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 … West Boylston, 34 Mass.App.Ct. 526 (presentment inadequate where letter described an intentional tort clearly barred by G.L.c. 258, § 10(c) while complaint alleged negligence), rev. denied 416 Mass. 1103 (1993).

Jakuttis v. Town of Dracut

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 14, 2023

The Doctrine of Qualified Immunity .................. 11 b. Summary Judgment and Qualified Immunity ............. 13 c. Motion to Dismiss and Qualified Immunity ............ 14 d. … whether the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the defendant's alleged violation.”