 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Carpenter v. Mass. Inst. of Tech., Docket Number: 03-2660-A,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT SUFFOLK, June 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In wrongful death case arising out of student's suicide, motions for protective orders filed by university, other defendants, and amici in another case were denied as depositions into amici's practices after students' suicide threats passed Mass. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1) test as they were likely to lead to discovery of admissible evidence.
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Candelario, SJC-09495,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, June 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial counsel's decision to forgo a defense of lack of criminal responsibility did not amount to ineffective assistance but was appropriate tactical decision given weaknesses of defense; even opinion of defendant's expert was half-hearted. There was no abuse of discretion in the denial of an evidentiary hearing on the motion for a new trial.
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Guthrie G., No. 05-P-47,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, June 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because of the exigency created by a juvenile defendant's flight with a gun, the police properly followed him when he later consent to get the gun; because the Miranda requirement of a meaningful opportunity for consultation with an adult were satisfied, the trial court erred in granting defendant's motion to suppress.
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Tanner, No. 05-P-145,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, June 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence alleged buyer had drugs while defendant had only money after cocaine sale was sufficient to support conviction for distributing cocaine, despite lack of eyewitness testimony. Admission of officer's testimony regarding extrajudicial statements that directly inculpated defendant as supplier amounted to prejudicial error, requiring reversal.
|
|||||
| Dickenson v. Cogswell, No. 05-P-543,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, June 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Removal of child to California was not in child's best interest; removal would force child into bicoastal existence, child's financial security would be diminished by costs of travel and decreased stability of mother's job, and child's relationship with father, who had been regular part of child's everyday life in Massachusetts, would suffer.
|
|||||
| Shaev v. Alvord, No. 05-P-1053.,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, June 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because nothing in a shareholder's Mass. R. App. P. 4(c) affidavit for leave to file a late appeal showed that the failure to send the notices to New York counsel were based on anything other than an erroneous assumption and not upon a "miscommunication," the shareholder's appeal was dismissed.
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Grissett, No. 05-P-301,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, June 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions for possession with intent to distribute cocaine and marijuana were reversed and the matter was remanded for a new trial because the testimony of the Commonwealth's expert witness was laced with improper opinion evidence (the expert opined more than once that he believed the drugs were for distribution).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
