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.
	State Courts - Massachusetts - February 10 - February 13, 2006
	Merchs. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Face Place, Inc., Docket Number: 00-558A, SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT PLYMOUTH, February 10, 2006, Filed View this case - free   Overview: Landlord, which negligently installed fluorescent lights, was not actor under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 260, § 2B as it did not render particularized services for design and construction of particular improvements to property. Installation of fluorescent lights was not type of design, planning, construction, or general administration required by § 2B. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Plastics Color & Compounding, Inc. v. Coz, Docket Number: 99-1152B, SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT WORCESTER, February 10, 2006, Filed View this case - free   Overview: Judgment was entered for tenant on landlord's § 11 counterclaim as tenant's constructive eviction allegations were not pretext to allow tenant to transfer its operations to more efficient manufacturing facility. Tenant's breach of its obligation to restore leased premises to its previous condition was devoid of unfair and deceptive acts. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Commonwealth v. Aman, Docket Number: 05-10198, SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT SUFFOLK, February 13, 2006, Filed View this case - free   Overview: Defendant's motion to suppress was allowed under Fourth Amendment and Mass. Const. Decl. Rights art. XIV as third party did not have apparent authority over premises to consent to entry of police where he was not asked whether he was occupant or lessee or whether he regularly stayed in apartment, had keys to it, or had other control over it. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Mirrione v. Jacobs, SJC-09601, SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, February 13, 2006, Decided View this case - free   Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Back to Top
	www.lexisnexis.com |  About LexisNexis |  Terms & Conditions |  Customer Support |  Sitemap |  Contact Us   CopyrightŠ 2008  LexisNexis®  All rights reserved.