Case law

Commonwealth v. Godfroy

420 Mass. 561 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jun 15, 1995

Section 5, as in effect at the time the defendant pleaded guilty, provided in relevant part: “If, after a person’s sixty day period of observation, the report filed with'the court by the two qualified examiners clearly indicates … No waiver has been established. We now consider the appropriate remedy. In Commonwealth v.

Moniz v. Crossland Mortgage Corp.

175 F.R.D. 1 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 2, 1997

As CrossLand explains, rate sheets establishing a “par” value for specific loans are set daily based on market forces. … There, this Court found that the factual record did not clearly establish that the yield spread premium paid by CrossLand to Dream House was not reasonable compensation for goods or services.

Commonwealth v. Easter

33 Mass. L. Rptr. 411 · Massachusetts Superior Court · May 27, 2016

In April of 2015, McKeon entered into a cooperation agreement with the Commonwealth in which she was granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for her testimony against Easter. … The doctrine clearly applies in cases where a defendant murders, threatens or intimidates a witness in an effort to procure that witness’s unavailability. Id. at 537 .

COMMONWEALTH v. AMBROSE A., a Juvenile

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Dec 20, 2024

Even if one of the six specific reasons is established by the requisite quantum of proof, expungement is not automatic. Instead, the judge must also determine whether expungement "is in the best interests of justice." … That is clearly not the situation we face here. Both rape of a child by force and assault and battery remain criminal acts regardless of the age of the person who commits them. See G.

United States v. Dray

659 F. Supp. 1426 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 5, 1987

I have considered his testimony with caution and weighed it with great care given his status as a convicted perjurer who appeared before me as an immunized accomplice witness pursuant to a plea agreement with the prosecution … This is because the reason for finding the other potential coconspirators not culpable would clearly be failure of proof in a single proceeding.

Miller v. Marchilli, Jr.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 9, 2019

A state court decision is an “unreasonable application” of clearly established federal law “if it correctly identifies the governing legal rule but applies that rule unreasonably to the facts of a particular prisoner’s … established federal law.

United States v. Pollock

417 F. Supp. 1332 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 6, 1976

POLLOCK was then advised that he was not immune from prosecution because he was agreeing to work with law enforcement authorities. … POLLOCK was then advised that he was not immune from prosecution because he was agreeing to work with law enforcement authorities.

Gross v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America, Inc.

48 Mass. App. Ct. 115 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Oct 21, 1999

To encourage the necessary private investment, “the statute provides that a project undertaken by a qualified applicant, such as an insurance company, is exempt from State and local taxation, including betterments and special … L. c. 40P. 2 The purpose of the act was “to establish a uniform statewide policy that broadly prohibits any regulatory scheme based upon or implementing rent control.” G. L. c. 40P, § 2.

Zenon v. Guzman

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 8, 2018

The Supreme Court has established a two-prong test to determine whether an act is “judicial” for purposes of establishing immunity. … Under this line of authority, Defendant is clearly immune from suit in this court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Godfrey v. Massachusetts Medical Service

359 Mass. 610 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jun 11, 1971

Section 4 clearly grants to the defendant the discretion to enter into contracts with podiatrists. See Answer of the Justices, 346 Mass. 787, 790 . … It is well established that legislation will be upheld “[ujnless . . . [it] cannot be supported upon any rational basis of fact that reasonably can be conceived to sustain it.” Sperry & Hutchinson Co. v.

Kelleher v. Personnel Administrator of the Department of Personnel Administration

421 Mass. 382 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 16, 1995

L. c. 31, § 15, may provide a route for appointing authorities to bypass better qualified, short list candidates, we must honor the clear legislative intent to allow such a procedure for provisional promotions. … Whatever interpretive authority the administrator may enjoy, it is clearly subordinate to that of the commission. G. L. c. 31, § 2 (b).

Commonwealth v. Valdez

475 Mass. 178 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Aug 17, 2016

An immigration judge will preside over the removal proceedings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(a)(1) (2012), at which the noncitizen has the burden of establishing that he or she “is clearly and beyond doubt entitled to be admitted … The Federal statute governing the inadmissibility of noncitizens, 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (a)(2), does not identify the crimes that qualify as “involving moral turpitude.”

In Re PYXSYS Corp.

288 B.R. 309 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 3, 2003

Indeed, there is a well established line of case law granting administrative expense priority for the postpetition storage of estate property. … that case, this Court ruled that postpetition rental receipts should be applied against a lessor’s *319 gross claim, but should not be applied against the cap imposed by § 502(b)(6). 9 Regarding the security deposit, it is clearly

Brookline v. COMMR. OF DEPT. OF ENVTL. QUALITY ENG'G

398 Mass. 404 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 8, 1986

Whether this theory is correct, it has been established for carcinogens, generally, that, as the exposure increases, the risk increases. … DEQE clearly has not erred in drawing the line between reasonable and unreasonable risks.

Hoffman v. Houghton Chemical Corp.

434 Mass. 624 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jul 19, 2001

We explained that, in such circumstances: “[T]he manufacturer’s immunity from liability if the consumer does not receive the warning is explicable on the grounds that the intermediary’s failure to warn is a *633 superseding … We conclude that, in all respects but one, tire instruction clearly, adequately, and correctly explained the applicable law to the jury. See Torre v. Harris-Seybold Co., 9 Mass. App. Ct. 660, 678-679 (1980).

Case of Nash

1 Rep. Cont. El. 439 · Massachusetts House of Representatives · Jul 1, 1843

White was not qualified, and did not assume to act. After three ineffectual ballotings for speaker, in which Mr. … Is not his intent as clearly shown by the designation on his ballot, as if he also had testified, that lie did not intend that vote for a representative from the town of Whately ?

Adair v. Sorenson

134 F.R.D. 13 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 7, 1991

Plaintiff cannot establish that he relied on events which occurred after he purchased his stock. Any injuries sustained by Mr. … The plaintiff clearly relied on the integrity of the market in making his investment decision.

United States v. Doherty

675 F. Supp. 726 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 22, 1987

The jury clearly chose to believe it. Thus, the jury must have found that the chief government witness, Gerald W. … See 28 U.S.C. § 1871 (b)(1) (establishing juror compensation at thirty dollars per day).

Commonwealth v. Desper

419 Mass. 163 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Dec 14, 1994

Clearly, the affidavit in this case was not a model of its kind. … The affidavit was silent on the procedures employed which qualified the informant’s purchase of narcotics as a “controlled buy.”

John Donnelly & Sons, Inc. v. Outdoor Advertising Board

369 Mass. 206 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Dec 15, 1975

In the present case, the specific question is whether the local regulations are “inconsistent with principles clearly established by comprehensive State legislation or by authorized regulations.” … Urban residents are not immune to ugliness. As noted by the New Jersey Superior Court in Westfield Motor Sales Co. v. Westfield, 129 N.J.