Case law

Rodrigues v. EG Systems, Inc.

639 F. Supp. 2d 131 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 23, 2009

In order to establish the prima facie case under Section 510, a plaintiff must show that he (1) is entitled to ERISA’s protection, (2) was qualified for the position, and (3) was discharged under circumstances that give rise … Rodrigues does not qualify as a participant in the plan under these provisions.

Dziembowski v. Stochaj

285 Mass. 413 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Feb 19, 1934

Clearly the vote of the town of Webster did not come within the terms of this section. Section 31 applies only to the board of public welfare — formerly overseers of the poor (see G. … Ed.) c. 41, § 2, that “Where official ballots are used, the establishment of a new board or office, or the fixing of the term of office of town officers where such term is optional, or the increase or reduction of the number

Johnson Lumber Co. v. Woodscape Homes, Inc.

51 Mass. App. Ct. 323 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Apr 12, 2001

It argues that the proviso, the second clause of § 24, narrowly qualifies the first clause and is applicable only to the rights and obligations of mortgagees. … We reject this argument for the well-established reasons repeated in the analogous holding of Turner v.

Greenup v. City of Cambridge

25 Mass. L. Rptr. 335 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Apr 15, 2009

The individual defendants, moreover, cannot be shown to have violated any “clearly established constitutional right,” so as to have lost their immunity from liability for their discretionary official actions.

School Committee of Waltham v. Waltham Educators Ass'n

398 Mass. 703 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Dec 3, 1986

L. c. 150E, § 8, set forth in the margin, 3 which authorize establishment of a grievance procedure in collective bargaining agreements between public employers and their employees. … Therefore, it could not qualify as corporal punishment. 3. Nature of arbitrator’s hearing. The committee argues that the arbitrator should not have heard the evidence and decided the case de nova.

Zades v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc.

446 F. Supp. 2d 29 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 6, 2006

At the first stage, the burden is on Plaintiff to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. … To establish a prima facie case of disability under the ADA and Chapter 151B, 13 Plaintiff must show that she: (1) had a disability as defined by the statutes; (2) was otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions

Rate Setting Commission v. Faulkner Hospital

411 Mass. 701 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jan 23, 1992

The commission is responsible for establishing rates to be paid providers of health care services under the Medicaid program. … In that opinion, however, we clearly stated, “[W]e decline to declare the rights of the parties under St. 1985, c. 200, § 3.” Id. at 439. Quincy City Hosp. v.

Commonwealth v. Beal

474 Mass. 341 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · May 24, 2016

Clearly, "the loss of a limb . . . would have a substantial impact on a victim on a par with injuries causing permanent disfigurement or risking death." Id. … Here, the evidence established that the defendant shot Joao in the lower back.

Ryan v. Fallon Community Health Plan, Inc.

921 F. Supp. 34 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 4, 1996

The Supreme Court has established that a law “relates to” an employee benefit plan “if it has a connection with or reference to such a plan.” Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. … Plaintiffs two common law claims for breach of contract clearly are not “saved” from ERISA preemption under this two-part *38 test.

Commonwealth v. Silvester

89 Mass. App. Ct. 350 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · May 2, 2016

testimony may be admitted under these principles, the judge must determine that (1) the witness's claimed lack of memory has been fabricated; (2) the testimony was not coerced, meaning the witness's statement must be clearly … He also received a grant of immunity after the judge determined that he had a valid basis for asserting his right against self- incrimination.

Commonwealth v. Francis

375 Mass. 211 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · May 10, 1978

Independent counsel advised Sarro that he could be charged with conspiracy if his involvement with Francis were established. … The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, when properly invoked, is clearly one of those interests. See Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308, 320 (1974), quoting from Alford v.

Hibbard v. Rocchi

11 Mass. App. Dec. 34 · Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · Dec 16, 1955

A study of the decisions will reveal that the immunities conferred on "seller’s talk” have been greatly exaggerated. … Whatever the earlier doctrine may have been, it is now clearly established in this Commonwealth that one who has been induced to enter into a contract in reliance upon a false though innocent representation of a material

Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc. v. City of Fitchburg

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 2025

In reading Title II, the First Circuit has said that to state an actionable reasonable accommodation claim, a plaintiff must establish “(1) that he is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) that he was either excluded … Plaintiffs’ attempt to establish municipal custom fares no better.

Commonwealth v. Agiasottelis

336 Mass. 12 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · May 6, 1957

The verdicts were clearly warranted by the evidence. Assignment 6. This assignment relates to the trial judge’s refusal to give certain instructions. … Millen, 289 Mass. 441, 477-478 , establishes the *17 applicable rule of law in this Commonwealth. See Seadlund v. United States, 97 Fed. (2d) 742, 748 (C. C. A. 7).

Doe v. City of Lowell

18 Mass. L. Rptr. 543 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Nov 18, 2004

The CD4 cells are a surrogate marker for the functioning of the immune system. … The needle stick that Doe sustained to his right index finger qualifies as an injury within the purview of the statute. Blair v.

Snow v. Housatonic Railroad

90 Mass. 441 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 15, 1864

Such we understand to be the rule of law, and the principles on which it is founded, as now fully established by authority. Seaver v. Boston & Maine Railroad, 14 Gray, 466 . Cayzer v. … So an individual could avail himself of a similar immunity, if he conducted his business exclusively by agents or servants. But the rule of law does not lead to any such absurd result.

Sherwood Forest Neighbors Association, Inc. v. Town of Becket

466 F. Supp. 2d 399 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 18, 2006

At the hearing, the court emphasized, as diplomatically but also as clearly as possi *401 ble, that Plaintiffs’ complaint was in flat violation of Fed.R.Civ.P. 8 — a prolix, wandering, impenetrable mess. … Specific conditions were established by the court for the pleading in the scheduling order.

Nylen v. Dalton

1 Mass. L. Rptr. 572 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Feb 22, 1994

Ill, 204(b) provides that “documents, incident reports or records otherwise available from original sources shall not be immune from subpoena, discovery or use in any judicial proceeding . . . merely because they were presented … Clearly the statutory medical peer review privilege is not absolute.

Sniffin v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

395 Mass. 415 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jul 15, 1985

The rent levels established by paragraph six are not clearly in conflict with the Niles decision invalidating the Goldberg formula for calculating rents. 3. Misrepresentation. … Use of the term “1976 class” in this section refers only to those members of the 1976 class who do not qualify for recovery as “1976 plaintiffs” or Columbia tenants.

Hyppolite ex rel. Hyppolite v. City of Boston

1 Mass. L. Rptr. 31 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jun 23, 1993

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 material fact in order to defeat the motion. … Chan would have been immune from suit for his “nonfeasance” under the common law. If this defense were so clearly meritorious, the city would surely have raised it in its own defense with or without Dr.