 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Cepulonis v. Dennehy, Docket Number: 05-02411B,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT WORCESTER, May 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A complaint was treated as one for declaratory judgment, not writ of habeas corpus, as inmate was not eligible for release. He had no right to withhold from parole board the records of his fully served sentences. Under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 127, § 135, the board had a right to see all of the inmate's sentences, including those that were fully served.
|
|||||
| City Fuel Corp. v. Nat'l Fire Ins. Co., SJC-09623,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Though insured was entitled to judgment declaring that release of oil from its parked delivery truck was covered because oil was "in transit" within meaning of policy, as this interpretation was an issue of first impression, and insurer's position was reasonable, insurer was entitled to summary judgment on insured's Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A claim.
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Matis, SJC-09480,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although trial judge had authority, under Mass. R. Crim. P. 17(a)(2), to order access to crime scene in private residence, on basis of showing that the information obtainable was relevant to defense, trial judge erred in allowing the motion where owner of the residence was not served with notice of motion and did not have opportunity to be heard.
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Richardson, Docket Number: 2005-693,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT ESSEX, May 10, 2006, Decided , May 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a photographic array consisting of eight males of similar appearance that did not point to or distinguish defendant's photo from the others did not violate U.S. Const. amends. IV, V, XIV, Mass. Const. Decl. Rights arts. 12, 14, or common-law principles of fairness, defendant's motion to suppress was denied.
|
|||||
| Sutton v. Valois, No. 04-P-1252.,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A house that had been titled in the names of a former boyfriend and girlfriend was properly awarded to the boyfriend, as its purchase was predicated on the girlfriend's promise to marry him and have a family, which she broke; she made no monetary contribution to its acquisition; and there was no increase in its equity.
|
|||||
| Cadle Co. v. Webb, No. 04-P-1749,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, May 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for guarantor was affirmed because suits were time-barred as personal guaranties on promissory notes, even if they ran to bank and overlay promissory notes to bank, were deemed contracts and were subject to six-year statute of limitations in Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 260, § 2.
|
|||||
| Gasior v. Mass. Gen. Hosp., SJC-09517,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, May 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The employee's claim that the employee was wrongfully dismissed in violation of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 151B, § 4(16), survived the employee's death, as did all of the remedies available to the employee under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 151B. Thus, the trial court erred in dismissing the employee's claim for punitive damages.
|
|||||
| Nguyen v. Univ. of Mass., No. 04-P-1653,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, May 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Disparate treatment and disparate impact claims failed because statutes relied on by plaintiffs, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 151B, §§ 4(1), (1C), and 1(8), did not provide protection for political beliefs, refugees, or refugees who were American. Discrimination claim was barred because it was not made before Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination.
|
|||||
| Pointer v. Castellani, Docket Number: 05-3003,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT SUFFOLK, May 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A court denied a former corporate officer's motion for indemnification to pay his attorneys' fees in defending against counterclaim that charged him with misappropriating corporate opportunities. Such charge was not the type for which indemnification was provided, and truth of charge had to be found at trial. No advancement was due under the facts.
|
|||||
| Waters v. Earthlink, Inc., Opinion No.: 98367, Docket Number: 01-628,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT BARNSTABLE, May 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A customer's motion to certify a class was denied; a breach of contract claim and a claim under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A for interruption of Internet access by internet service providers required inquiry into approximately 18,000 customers' service. The factor of predominance under Mass. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, § 9 was not met.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
