 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brooks Automation, Inc. v. Blueshift Techs., Inc., Docket Number: 05-3973-BLS2,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT SUFFOLK, April 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the essence of the Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A counterclaim, upon which a corporation was successful, was that a competitor filed a frivolous suit to to severely, perhaps fatally, injure the corporation, the corporation was entitled to the reasonable attorneys fees and costs incurred in defending itself and in prosecuting its counterclaim.
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Green, No. 04-P-1762,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, April 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As the evidence established that defendant intended to take the bank's property permanently and committed the overt act of trying to negotiate and deposit a counterfeit check in furtherance of that intent, he was properly convicted of attempted larceny in violation of Mass. Gen. Laws. ch. 274, § 6 and Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 266, § 30.
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Palacios, No. 05-P-52,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, April 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judge's remark defendant's license had been suspended did not relieve Commonwealth of burden of proof, particularly in light of final instruction which clearly indicated notice of suspension was element Commonwealth had to prove. Improper reference to prior "conviction," despite fact defendant admitted to sufficient facts, did not affect verdict.
|
|||||
| Hamouda v. Harris, No. 05-P-79,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, April 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since there was no reason why parking for two vehicles inside a garage was materially different from parking on the footprint of the garage, there appeared no reason to distinguish between residential and commercial use of the building. As to the number of vehicles, however, the record gave instruction that two should be the limit.
|
|||||
| Mahoney v. DeMatteo-Flatiron LLP, No. 05-P-459,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, April 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in dismissing plaintiff's complaint based on statute of limitations in Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 260, § 2A because when last day for commencement of tort action fell on a Sunday or a legal holiday, the action could be commenced on the next succeeding business day pursuant to Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 220, § 6 and Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 4, § 9.
|
|||||
| Miranda v. Anderson, Docket Number: BACV2005-140,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT BARNSTABLE, April 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Parents were not liable for their daughter's accident caused when her glasses slipped; parents repaired glasses with her aunt's help, but they had no duty to driver. Duty was limited by foreseeability, no relationship existed between driver and defendants, and repairing glasses did not give rise to duty in the way that giving alcohol to minors did.
|
|||||
| Paige v. Dennis-Yarmouth Reg'l Sch. Dist., Docket Number: BACV2004-088,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT BARNSTABLE, April 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a discrimination case contained evidence supporting both the former employee's position and the former employers' position, the court could not resolve the factual issue and could not determine the rights of the parties as a matter of law without the factual issue being resolved. Thus, the employers' motion for summary judgment was denied.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, No. 05-P-615,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, April 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in not dismissing a drivers' suit against the Massachusetts Registrar of Motor Vehicles for negligently reporting that his vehicle's registration had been revoked, as the suit was barred by the sovereign immunity provisions of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258, § 10(e) of the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258.
|
|||||
| State St. Bank & Trust Co. v. Deputy Dir., Nos. 04-P-1522 & 04-P-1663.,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, April 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in reversing an award of unemployment benefits to former employees of a bank because their acceptance of a voluntary separation package constituted voluntary separation for good cause under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 151A, § 25(e)(1), as they were unable to determine the likelihood that they would be involuntarily terminated.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
