 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Caisse v. Discepolo, Docket Number: WOCV 2005-0109,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT WORCESTER, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although there were material facts in dispute regarding the likelihood of success of a client's underlying claim, it could not be said that the disputed facts could not be resolved in the client's favor at a trial; accordingly, the client's motion for summary judgment in a malpractice action against his attorney was denied.
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Barboza, No. 06-P-499,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Single justice of the appellate court properly granted defendant's motion to file a late notice of appeal, as appellate counsel stated that defendant had filed a timely notice of appeal which was never received by the trial court, and the motion was filed within the one-year period provided by Mass. RAP 14(b).
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Gaylardo, No. 06-P-500,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting defendant's motion to suppress evidence during his trial on a charge of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, because the circumstances, in which a police officer found defendant sitting in his running car late on a cold night, permitted the officer to perform a well-being check.
|
|||||
| Coworx Staffing Servs., LLC v. Coleman, Opinion No.: 97235, Docket Number: 2005-436F,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT MIDDLESEX, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff temporary staffing company's Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A claim was dismissed because Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A did not apply to disputes arising from the employment relationship, and the company's allegation that defendant competitor and franchisee induced the employee to breach her non-compete agreement arose from an employment relationship.
|
|||||
| Ellis v. Barnstable Zoning Bd. of Appeals, Opinion No.: 97429, Docket Number: 05-00185,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT BARNSTABLE, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Variance issued to property owner was annulled as findings of zoning board of appeals were insufficient under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 40A, § 10 since topographical finding did not identify topographical feature that precluded two lots from being used as one, and substantial hardship and substantial derogation findings parroted statutory language.
|
|||||
| Evans v. Lorillard Tobacco Co., Opinion No.: 97053, Docket Number: 04-2840A,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT SUFFOLK, February 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a negligence and wrongful death suit brought by an estate against a group of cigarette manufacturers, the trial court determined that most of the estate's common law counts were not preempted by the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertisement Act, 15 U.S.C.S. §§ 1331-1341, but that other counts failed to state a cause of action.
|
|||||
| Herrick v. Essex Reg'l Ret. Bd., No. 06-P-334,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in determining it lacked authority to allow claimant to amend his complaint to name proper party defendant; his filing of a complaint for administrative review within 30-day time limit set forth in Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 30A, § 14(1) containing ample references to proper party complied with statute so as to allow amendment.
|
|||||
| Schmitt v. Murphy, Opinion No.: 97281, Docket Number: WOCV2006-01972A,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT WORCESTER, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a patient was civilly committed to the state hospital as a sexually dangerous person, he was not considered a "prisoner" within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act; therefore, he was not required to exhaust his administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1997(e)(a) before challenging the hospital's mail regulations.
|
|||||
| Wilborn v. Commonwealth, SJC-09547,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an inmate's Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 211, § 3 petition sought relief that was either sought or could have been sought in a superior court, and because the inmate received plenary review on direct appeal, a single justice of the supreme judicial court did not err or abuse his discretion in denying relief.
|
|||||
| Wilfert Bros. Realty Co. v. Mass. Comm'n Against Discrimination, Opinion No.: 97261, Docket Number: 02-2671,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT MIDDLESEX, February 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant employee lost a motion to dismiss plaintiff employer's complaint seeking judicial review of a Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination finding of discrimination, the motion was based on reasonable grounds, and the award of attorneys fees to the employee did not exclude fees in connection with the motion to dismiss.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
