Case law

Cambridge Housing Authority v. Civil Service Commission

7 Mass. App. Ct. 586 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · May 17, 1979

The board clearly has the right to abolish a position it finds to be unnecessary and uneconomical. … Although the hearing officer concluded that "the evidence does not establish a quantum of bad faith, which, in itself, is sufficient to invalidate” the board’s action, see Murray v.

Kendall v. Director of the Division of Employment Security

393 Mass. 731 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jan 23, 1985

She had no other employment during the required base period to establish eligibility for unemployment benefits. … Clearly the same conclusion can be reached where the institution is devoted to the care of the mentally handicapped under the auspices of a religious order of nuns.

United States Jaycees v. Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination

391 Mass. 594 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Apr 3, 1984

Associate membership is available to persons (including women, and men over thirty-five) and to businesses that are not qualified to be individual members. … Jaycees clearly does not fall within this characterization: all of the events that the organization promotes are open to the public, men and women alike. Whatever the wisdom of the U.S.

Giacalone v. I.E.S., Inc.

10 Mass. L. Rptr. 209 · Massachusetts Superior Court · May 17, 1999

They retained IES because they believed IES was qualified to perform an environmental site investigation. … Some damages, however, would clearly be recoverable were this case to proceed to trial.

Poirier v. Massachusetts Department of Corrections

160 F. Supp. 3d 399 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 4, 2016

Second, “the facts so gleaned must conclusively establish the affirmative defense.” Id.; see Santana-Castro, 579 F.3d at 113-14. Discussion A. … The court also dismissed the DOC as a defendant on Eleventh Amendment grounds and found that, even if the constitutional analysis were incorrect, the Commissioner would be entitled to qualified immunity for any claim for

Loltek-Jick v. O'Toole

29 Mass. L. Rptr. 269 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Dec 15, 2011

Veeder, Absolute Immunity in Defamation: Judicial Proceedings, 9 Colum.L.Ref. 463, 469-70 (1909). … Kunian’s conduct in drafting the P and S clearly had no relation to a pending or threatened proceeding.

Buffalo-Water 1, LLC v. Fidelity Real Estate Company, LLC

481 Mass. 13 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 26, 2018

The alleged appearance of bias does not qualify as "fraud, corruption, dishonesty or bad faith." Eliot, 322 Mass. at 91. … The option agreement clearly states that the property's value would be determined through an appraisal process, every step of which was followed here.

Bristol Asphalt Co., Inc. v. Rochester Bituminous Products, Inc.

Massachusetts Appeals Court · Apr 28, 2023

for nonsham litigation1 (which, I note, is in any event an immunity from liability, not suit). … In Wenger, for example, the Supreme Judicial Court clearly applied a de novo standard of review in holding, as a matter of law, that two counts of a plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed under the anti-SLAPP statute, because

Crevier v. Town of Spencer

600 F. Supp. 2d 242 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 26, 2008

Crohn’s disease is clearly a disability within the meaning of the ADA. See, e.g. Nesser v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 160 F.3d 442, 445 (8th Cir.1998). … Thus, plaintiff qualifies as “disabled” within the meaning of the ADA. *254 2.

School Committee v. Education Ass'n

423 Mass. 34 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jun 20, 1996

Article XIV (e) of the agreement provides that, when a vacancy occurs in a coaching position, “preference will be given to athletically qualified, full-time teachers at the school where the vacancy occurs.” … Thus, the agreement addresses procedures for the appointment of coaches, an alleged violation of which clearly would be an appropriate subject for grievance and arbitration.

Cumberland Farms, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection

209 B.R. 786 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 31, 1996

The First Circuit in Mammoth Mart established a two-prong test to determine whether a claim qualifies for administrative expense status. … The First Circuit, however, stated that this situation “falls within the clearly enunciated rationale of Reading Co. v.

DeCaro v. Hasbro, Inc.

542 F. Supp. 2d 141 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 31, 2008

To establish a claim under 151B, § 4(16), DeCaro must prove: (1) [he] is handicapped within the meaning of the statute; (2)[he] is a ‘qualified handicapped person’ (meaning that, notwithstanding the handicap, [he] can perform … Though it concedes that DeCaro is a handicapped individual, Hasbro argues that it is entitled to summary-judgment because, on the record before the court, Plaintiff cannot establish (1) that he was a “qualified handicapped

United States v. Langton

26 F. Cas. 862 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1829

If, then, the sum be mistaken, and we resort to the other words of the instrument to qualify or explain the intention, we there find the bonds described to be those, on which Monroe is surety. … The onus probandi is on the United States in this ease, to establish, that the bond now in controversy is covered by the assignment; for otherwise, Monroe has a right to retain for the deficiency due to him.

Hickey v. Commissioner of Public Welfare

38 Mass. App. Ct. 259 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Mar 16, 1995

To qualify as loans, however, there needed to be a document, signed by the borrower and expressing the borrower’s intent to repay. Ibid. … Hickey’s catalog of failings harp on such matters as a failure to distinguish clearly betwen SSI and SSDI and whether Hickey ever said that motels were a satisfactory place to live (she did not).

Commonwealth v. Green

420 Mass. 771 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jul 17, 1995

Even if the judge had made a finding of impropriety, that finding would have been clearly erroneous. … Hood’s testimony established that the defendant had a motive to kill the victim. She further established that he had threatened the victim.

Briggs v. Commonwealth

429 Mass. 241 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 22, 1999

States must establish a schedule of reimbursement rates for Medicaid covered services. See 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(13). … QMBs, in turn, fall into two groups: those who are not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid (“pure” QMBs) and those whose level of financial need is so great as to qualify them for Medicaid (“dual eligibles”).

Cox v. T.S. Truck Services, Inc.

19 Mass. L. Rptr. 695 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Aug 23, 2005

Damages With respect to the hauling of bituminous concrete to public construction projects, the plaintiffs have established their entitlement to prevailing wages. … As previously noted, neither party offered any direct evidence of the actual rate established by the commissioner. See fri. 5, supra

Nascimento v. Harvard Community Health Plan, Inc.

7 Mass. L. Rptr. 572 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Sep 26, 1997

Nascimento, and to other participants in its health plan, by purchasing memberships for them in HCHP, a federally qualified HMO that is independent of Harvard University. … Although an action for specific performance clearly is an action designed to enforce contractual rights, so too is an action for damages flowing from an alleged contractual breach.

Bertram v. Viglas

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 16, 2020

During the 9 The Court also concludes that any facts that Viglas omitted from his incident report were not required to be included by clearly established Fourth Amendment law; thus, Viglas is entitled to qualified immunity … Accordingly, Viglas is also entitled to qualified immunity on this theory of liability. arrest claim.”).

Wingate v. Emery Air Freight Corp.

385 Mass. 402 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 2, 1982

. *405 The report clearly constituted hearsay evidence, and just as clearly was admitted in evidence by the judge on two grounds: that it was an inconsistent prior statement of the plaintiff, and was a business record within … On the other hand, a document which qualified as a business record would not be admissible to establish a statement of opinion contained in it. Julian v. Randazzo, 380 Mass. 391, 393 (1980). Contrast Fed. R.