Case law

Commerce Insurance v. J&J Builders, LLC

30 Mass. L. Rptr. 483 · Massachusetts Superior Court · May 30, 2012

The defendant J&J Builders, LLC is a dissolved limited liability company (hereinafter “LLC”) originally established pursuant to G.L. Ch. 156C. … The undisputed facts .establish that in or about 2006, J&J Builders, LLC engaged in the construction of the Luzitania Court Condominiums in Gloucester, Massachusetts.

Marrero v. City of Brockton

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 5, 2024

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Was the Right Clearly Established? Similarly, it is premature to determine whether the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the defendant’s alleged violation.

Perley v. City of Cambridge

220 Mass. 507 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 31, 1915

We are able to perceive no sound reason why this well established rule should not apply in instances where a municipality enters without shadow of right and as a pure trespasser upon the land of another and without consent … A municipality enjoys no special immunity in this respect not accorded in general to others. It commonly possesses the power to exercise eminent domain and thus take the property of the landowner against his will.

Kpakolo v. Harrigan

2008 Mass. App. Div. 178 · Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · Sep 8, 2008

whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed, (2) whether retroactive application will further the rule, and (3) whether inequitable results, or injustice or hardships, will be avoided by a holding of nonretroactivity.” … Harrigan is, thus, immune from liability pursuant to G.L.c. 258, §2, and Kpakolo’s claim against him was properly dismissed.

Alexander Santiago Rosa v. Affordable Interior Systems, Inc.

Massachusetts Appeals Court · Aug 27, 2025

therefore not entitled to immunity under the act. … "The standard of review of a grant of summary judgment is whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, all material facts have been established and the moving party is entitled to

Wheaton College v. Labor Relations Commission

352 Mass. 731 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jun 14, 1967

Garland Sch. of Home Making, 296 Mass. 378 (tax immunity) ; Assessors of Dover v. Dominican Fathers, Province of St. Joseph, 334 Mass. 530, 538 , and cases cited (tax immunity); Boxer v. … Boston Symphony Orchestra, Inc. 342 Mass. 537, 540-541 (tort immunity); Grueninger v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, 343 Mass. 338 (tort immunity).

Juniper Development Group v. Kahn (In Re Hemingway Transport, Inc.)

70 B.R. 549 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 2, 1987

Cleanups may be financed through the Hazardous Substance Response Trust Fund established by section 221(a) of CERCLA. Id. at § 9631(a). … In its memorandum, the United States clearly and unequivocally sets forth the parameters of the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

John Doe v. Spears

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 22, 2022

The doctrine of qualified immunity provides government officials immunity from suit when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Thus, Kelly’s alleged conduct did not violate any clearly established constitutional right and she is entitled to qualified immunity.

George MacKie v. Robert Joss.

Massachusetts Appeals Court · Jul 31, 2023

Joss is entitled to qualified immunity." … of "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."

Clapp v. Tobin

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 8, 2019

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … In the alternative, because Clapp has failed to allege that Flanagan violated a clearly established constitutional right, Flanagan is entitled to qualified immunity and Clapp has failed to state a cognizable claim.

Bannon v. Godin

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 5, 2022

Qualified immunity attaches to discretionary conduct of government officials that “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity. Saucier v.

Hernandez v. Colon

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 11, 2018

Kisela asserted qualified immunity. Id. at 1150. The question before the Court was "whether at the time of the shooting Kisela's actions violated clearly established law." Id. … clearly established the unconstitutionality of [his] conduct."

Commonwealth v. Meas

467 Mass. 434 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 12, 2014

Pen was clearly frightened. After the showup identifications were completed, at some point after 12:45 a.m., the defendant and the other occupants of the black Honda were transported to the Lowell police station. … Also, the jury *451 were not required to rely on Badillo’s testimony to establish the salient facts concerning the shooting.

Lopes v. Riendeau

177 F. Supp. 3d 634 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 30, 2016

Rather, they plead only qualified immunity, according to plaintiff. … Nickl and Riendeau, however, did file answers and each raised the defense of qualified immunity. (Docket Entry ## 23, 24).

Browder v. City of Boston

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 15, 2025

Specifically, she argues that she is entitled to qualified immunity because the conduct that Plaintiff challenges is discretionary and because Plaintiff has not alleged that his clearly established right was violated. … The doctrine of qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Baker v. Coxe

940 F. Supp. 409 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 20, 1996

without prejudice to the ability of the EOEA Defendants to assert their qualified immunity defense at a later point in the proceedings. … Cir.1993) (holding that question of intent or motivation with respect to retaliation for exercise of First Amendment rights precluded finding that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity, but left question open for

Suzanne A v. Clarke

1 Mass. L. Rptr. 459 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Jan 19, 1994

“[PJroceedings, reports, findings and records” of a PRC “(shall not] be immune from subpoena, discovery or use as evidence in any proceeding against a member of such committee to establish a cause of action pursuant to [G.L.c … The statute clearly excludes from its protection documents which were not generated by a PRC, but rather were presented to the PRC from other sources and are “otherwise available” from such original sources.

Braintree Baptist Temple v. Holbrook Public Schools

616 F. Supp. 81 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 18, 1984

The assertion of a defense of immunity is clearly not grounds for dismissal of a § 1983 complaint. … Even if plaintiffs establish their standing to sue the state defendants, the Eleventh Amendment clearly bars suit against the Board of Education and Department of Education, Alabama v.

Kelley v. DiPaola

379 F. Supp. 2d 96 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 13, 2005

. § 1997e(c), stating that several of the defendants appeared to be immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment (sovereign immunity) and inviting a response from the plaintiff (“the Show Cause Memorandum”). … King is unresponsive to defendants' motion for summary judgment because it discusses qualified, rather than sovereign, immunity.

Arrington v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority

306 F. Supp. 1355 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 22, 1969

. § 1983) insofar as it denies them privileges and immunities guaranteed by the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. … Prior to the present rank list, the MBTA had established two previous lists, one in 1965 and another in 1967.