Case law

Grant v. Ross

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 19, 2018

the court “shall dismiss the case . . . if the court determines that - . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted[] or . . . seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … In order to secure injunctive relief, Grant must establish that she is likely to succeed on her claim.

United States v. Three Juveniles

886 F. Supp. 934 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 1, 1995

Another leader was Michael Rasnick, age twenty-five, who was an immunized cooperating witness at the trial of the juveniles. Rasnick was a self-avowed white supremacist and separatist. … any of the aforesaid establishments; and (ii) which holds itself out as serving patrons of such establishments.”

Burke v. Rivo

406 Mass. 764 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 1, 1990

The principal issue is whether the plaintiffs are entitled, if they establish liability, to the cost of raising their child. … Clearly, there may be numerous other motivations for submitting to sterilization procedures. It is unclear whether cases brought by such parents come within the rule of damages announced in this decision.

Westfield High School L.I.F.E. Club v. City of Westfield

249 F. Supp. 2d 98 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 17, 2003

The Act’s promise of absolute immunity is illusory, as the Supremacy Clause prevents Massachusetts from limiting remedies provided by federal law as, for instance, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of the Establishment … Clearly, the balance of hardships weighs in their favor. 4.

Feldman v. Aspen Technology, Inc.

22 Mass. L. Rptr. 341 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Mar 3, 2007

The second sentence thus qualifies the requirement of particularity for fraud cases contained in the first sentence, permitting a general statement of scienter to suffice. James W. Smith & Hiller B. … Whether Feldman can establish damages is a factual issue for resolution at a later time, but the allegation clearly meets the jurisdictional requirements of G.L.c. 212, §3.

Katz v. Pershing, LLC

806 F. Supp. 2d 452 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 23, 2011

“Future injury must be imminent to qualify as injury-in-fact” to ensure that the “alleged injury is not too speculative.” Sea Shore Corp. v. Sullivan, 158 F.3d 51, 56 (1st Cir.1998). … In this last regard, Pershing notes that its Clearing Agreement with NPC clearly states that the agreement is “not intended to confer any benefits on third-parties including, but not limited to, customers of [NPC].”

United States Trustee v. Burton (In re Rosario)

493 B.R. 292 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · May 29, 2013

When asked if, after completing the form, she told Moya “that he qualified,” Santos answered “correct.” Trial Tr. 3 169:18-19. … informing him, upon completion of the means test, that he did so “qualify.”

Massachusetts Ass'n of Older Americans v. Spirito

92 F.R.D. 129 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 20, 1981

Although plaintiffs concede that it is not possible to determine which persons whose AFDC or SSI benefits were terminated due to excess income were still at an income level which qualified them for Medicaid, it is fair to … This aspect of the case is clearly appropriate for class certification under Rule 23(b)(2).

Watuppa Reservoir Co. v. City of Fall River

1 L.R.A. 466 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 29, 1888

The which clearly to determine, it is declared that in all creeks, coves, and other places about and upon salt water, where the sea ebbs and flows, the proprietor, or the land adjoining, shall have propriety to the low water … grant exclude such reservation ; so that the grant from the State of land upon a stream flowing from a great pond did not convey an unqualified fee with the right to enjoy the usual and natural flow of the stream, but a qualified

Huertas v. Astrue

844 F. Supp. 2d 197 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 21, 2012

SiVStand Option Plaintiff first argues that the above hypothetical did not sufficiently establish to the VE the frequency at which the potential employee must change position. … In addition, the claimant in Arocho was only qualified to perform sedentary work.

STATE POLICE FOR AUTOMATIC RETIREMENT v. Difava

164 F. Supp. 2d 141 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 5, 2001

The Court also allowed the State defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint on qualified immunity grounds, with prejudice, insofar as the plaintiffs sought monetary damages. ( Id. ) SPARA amended its complaint two more times … Com., 373 Mass. 359, 366 , 366 N.E.2d 1262 (1977) (stating that such discretion is necessary to "establish[] and sustain[] uniform and consistent legal policy for the Commonwealth.").

In re Polymedica Corp. Securities Litigation

224 F.R.D. 27 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 7, 2004

These questions are “illustrative rather than exhaustive, but establish the existence of the commonality required by Rule 23.” Kirby, 116 F.R.D. at 306 . … I look first, however, to whether the proposed class qualifies under Rule 23(b)(1) or Rule 23(b)(2).

Semedo v. Medeiros

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 9, 2019

The petitioner must show that the state court’s decision was either “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States” or … In the absence of “clearly established” federal law, granting habeas relief is not authorized. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); see Carey v. Musladin, 549 U.S. 70, 77 (2006). III.

Biogen Idec MA, Inc. v. Cahill

22 Mass. L. Rptr. 181 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Feb 27, 2007

The Treasurer has “a wide range of discretion in establishing the parameters of [his] authority pursuant to . . . enabling legislation.” . . . … Statutory interpretation is a quintessential judicial responsibility, to be undertaken using well-established guiding principles.

Ing v. Tufts University

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 13, 2022

A plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of sex discrimination by showing that “(1) she is a member of a protected class, (2) she was qualified for an open position for which she applied, (3) she was rejected, and ( … Wolff, that she was not qualified for a promotion. Dr.

Inhabitants of Lynnfield v. Inhabitants of Peabody

219 Mass. 322 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 24, 1914

was not to be applied to grants preceding such establishment. … Woods, 108 Mass. 160, 169 , 170: “Unless qualified by restrictive words, they pass the soil towards the centre of the water, as far as the grantor owns.

Rae v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts MBTA

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 22, 2021

Because the evidence “establishe[d]” that Lt. … Rae must show that the Commonwealth has waived sovereign immunity with respect to his Wage Act claim.

Commonwealth v. Duddie Ford, Inc.

28 Mass. App. Ct. 426 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Mar 26, 1990

The judge made a finding that the loan applications and income verification documents qualified as business records, but because of what he perceived as a “totem pole hearsay” *435 problem 9 ruled that they could be admitted … Viewing the charge as a whole, 18 we conclude that the judge clearly and correctly imparted that a conviction under G.

Richards v. Hansen

1 F. 54 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Nov 24, 1879

Owners in such cases must see to it that the master is well qualified for his situation, as they are directly responsible for his negligences and unskilfulnoss in the performance of his duty. … to show that the vessel, when she rolls deep and heavy, is more likely to blow and expose cargo stowed in her aft lower hold to wet, is quite unnecessary, as the conclu *58 sion accords with all experience, and is fully established

United States v. Edwards

19 F. Supp. 3d 366 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 16, 2014

The First Circuit in Janosko established a three-part test qualifying the meaning of “other expenses” under Section 3663A(b)(4). 642 F.3d at 42 . … This Court is “clearly without authority” to award fees and costs in a “wholly separate civil suit” from state court, and will not do so here. Barany, 884 F.2d at 1261 .