 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Cote-Whitacre v. Dep't of Pub. Health, SJC-09436,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, March 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Marino v. Bd. of Appeal on Motor Vehicle Liab. Policies & Bonds, Docket Number: MICV2004-4226,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT MIDDLESEX, March 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Assessment of an insurance surcharge by an insurer was affirmed as the Massachusetts Board of Appeal on Motor Vehicle Liability Policies and Bond had sufficient substantial evidence to support the decision under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 30A, § 1(6) in the form of testimony from a driver in an accident and statements from witnesses contained in reports.
|
|||||
| Mark Bombara Interior Design v. Bowler, SJC-09523,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, March 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since a designer, through himself or others, undertook residential contracting work, it was immaterial that he did not hold himself out as a contractor or that he described his studio as that of an interior designer. Thus, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 142A, § 1 and Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, § 2 counterclaims should not have been dismissed.
|
|||||
| Mystic Valley Dev. Comm'n v. Dep't of Hous. & Cmty. Dev., Docket Number: 05-1157,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT MIDDLESEX, March 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A development commission and corporation that closed its business rather than relocate had a right to relocation benefits under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 79A, § 7(I)(A)(2). Under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 30A, court deferred to a hearing officer's findings and calculation of benefits; it did not matter that the business closed and was not relocated.
|
|||||
| Shamrock Realty Co. v. O'Brien, Docket Number: 02-4097,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT SUFFOLK, March 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for a creditor was vacated and a guarantor's summary judgment motion was allowed as, given that a guarantee did not contain a choice of law clause and that the guarantee was executed in Massachusetts by a Massachusetts resident, there was no reason to apply Rhode Island law. Suit was time barred under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 260, § 2.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
