Case law

Owens v. City of Malden

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 4, 2021

For the Wage Act to apply to private detail work, the Officers must qualify as “employees” under the Wage Act.6 See Malden Police Patrolmen’s Ass’n, 92 Mass. App. Ct. at 63. … That question is not at issue here, however, because the Plaintiffs’ claim in count II of the amended complaint is clearly brought for violation of the Wage Act. See Am.

Cozy, Inc. v. Dorel Juvenile Group, Inc.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 22, 2023

“The purpose of the ‘specific reference’ requirement is clearly to ensure that someone examining a patent claiming the benefit of one earlier filed is readily able to assess the patent’s priority date.” … The record establishes that Brown was filed in June 1999 and that Balgobin was filed in May 2000. (Id. at COZY_0000001088). It also establishes that the Patent Examiner considered prior art from 1994 through 2010.

Lawrence v. Dana

15 F. Cas. 26 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Sep 20, 1869

Expressions of a doubtful character are not sufficient to support such a defence as against a contract fully executed on the part of the complainant; but the meaning of the language employed must be clearly such thát a man … The proposed International Code of Spanish America, of 1862, in connection with its recognition of the declaration of Paris, had this provision : ‘ Besides the articles qualified as such, are to be deemed contraband of war

Abiomed, Inc. v. Maquet Cardiovascular LLC

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 15, 2023

Clearly, I knew people were discussing it, but I thought it is not possible technologically. … At the very least, Maquet has established that there is a genuine dispute of fact as to what a person of ordinary skill would recognize from the specification.

Mazurek v. Seres Therapeutics, Inc.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 30, 2018

Corp., 82 F.3d 1194, 1217 n.31 (1st Cir. 1996) (citing In re Clearly Canadian Secs. Litig., 875 F. Supp. 1410, 1420 (N.D. Cal.1995)), superseded by statute on other grounds, 15 U.S.C. § 78u–4(b)(1). … First, Plaintiffs contend that they specifically allege that the Pomerantz statement about high probability of success was qualified by stating that his belief was supported by clinical data he had seen that indicated a

Gammon v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 12, 2020

Gammon was required to show that, solely because of physical disability, she could not work any job at all for which she was reasonably qualified. Reliance Standard approved Ms. … The surveillance does not necessarily establish that Ms. Gammon could work a full-time job.

DeCepeda v. Berryhill

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 6, 2018

Standard for Entitlement to Social Security Disability Insurance In order to qualify for SSDI, a claimant must demonstrate that he or she is disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act.1 A claimant is disabled … The questionnaire does not include any clearly expressed opinions about the effect of depression on Plaintiff’s ability to work (id. at 304-05).

Belezos v. Board of Selectmen of Hingham, Massachusetts

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 27, 2019

Finally, with respect to appointment of class counsel, plaintiff contends that “Zotos is qualified, experienced and able to litigate this case” pursuant to Rule 23(g). … This suffices to establish commonality. C.

In the Matter of Foster

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Aug 31, 2023

Foster asserted that Ballou had limited first-hand knowledge of the events described in the document requests, some documents were protected by the qualified law enforcement privilege, and Ballou should not be compelled … At that meeting, Kaczmarek informed the attendees that she believed everything in Ballou's file had been turned over.9 Kaczmarek did not clearly explain that the materials in Ballou's file were but a subset of the

Shea v. Millett

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 10, 2020

The evidence clearly demonstrates that both Plaintiff and Defendant understood that their oral agreement would extend beyond one year. … Instead, a party’s actions may qualify him or her as a broker or finder regardless of how he or she labels his or her services. See Mass. Gen.

Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence Corp. v. The School Committee of the City of Boston

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 1, 2021

Students who were homeless or in the custody of the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families qualified for a special “zip code” created for them to participate in the … Although these racist text messages are clearly new evidence, they are evidence that could have been discovered earlier by the Coalition had it not chosen to forgo discovery and followed

LendingClub Bank, National Association v. Valley National Bank

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 31, 2026

See Baskin-Robbins, 825 F.3d at 40 (“Where, as here, parties of substantial means are involved, cross-country travel ordinarily does not qualify as a special or unusual burden.”). … Venue clearly would have been appropriate in the District of New Jersey.

Pegasystems Inc. v. Appian Corporation

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 2022

The contract provided that BPM.com would conduct market research and produce a white paper that would “clearly identify and articulate[] the value delta of Appian over Pega.” … As discussed above, Pegasystems has failed to establish a lack of injury or falsity.

Farzinpour v. Berklee College of Music

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 12, 2022

After Farzinpour missed his train home, Alali insisted on going to another establishment. … Plaintiff has provided evidence that he was qualified for his job as a professor of conducting.

Latimore v. Suffolk County House of Correction

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 3, 2021

In addition, the transcript is not the kind of material that qualifies as self-authenticating under the Federal Rules of Evidence. See Fed. R. Evid. 902. … In paragraph 65, plaintiff states that Dorgan is “clearly explaining on camera” the procedure with respect to inmate property. (Docket Entry # 256, p. 12, ¶ 65).

Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc.

287 F. Supp. 2d 126 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 30, 2003

In Wamer-Jenkinson, the Supreme Court merely stated that the burden was on the patent holder to establish the reason for an amendment. 520 U.S. at 33 , 117 S.Ct. 1040 . … Neither the Supreme Court, nor the Federal Circuit has yet provided explicit guidance as to what qualifies as a tangential relationship.

Denson v. Mici

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 20, 2022

To qualify, he must show “exceptional circumstances.” Cookish, 787 F.2d at 2; see Minggia v. Worcester Cty. House of Corr., No. 11-cv- 40002-FDS, 2012 WL 928711, at *1 (D. Mass. … The former could hardly allege a substantial burden more clearly: …I cannot use those oils for prayer purposes.

MSP Recovery Claims, Series LLC v. Plymouth Rock Assurance Corporation, Inc.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 24, 2023

Aug. 22, 2016) (“‘It is well established that the [qualified] witness need not be the person who actually prepared the record’ . . . … Mar. 20, 2018) (finding that the MSPA clearly “sets forth a timeframe in which the Government must request reimbursement”).

CDM Smith Inc. v. Atasi

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 29, 2022

“The burden of proof in ‘establishing the conclusive effect of a foreign judgment is on the party asserting conclusiveness.’” Bridgeway Corp. v. Citibank, 45 F. … There is fraud on the court “where it can be demonstrated, clearly and convincingly, that a party has essentially set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial

Safety Insurance Company v. Marlette Homes, Inc.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 3, 2021

Architects, construction engineers, and builders fall clearly within the statute’s scope. See Dighton, 399 at 697. The statute, however, does not protect “materialmen” or “mere suppliers of standardized products.” … Under Massachusetts law, the Manufactured Housing Act “establishes a statutory scheme intended to protect tenants of manufactured housing communities” because “[b]oth the Legislature and the courts of the Commonwealth have