 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Boston Computer Group, Inc. v. Anderson, Opinion No.: 98820, Docket Number: 06-00879,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT MIDDLESEX, July 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because questions of fact existed as to whether a shareholder's retention of advancements made by the company was sufficient to prove a claim for money had and received, and as to whether the shareholder was unjustly enriched thereby, the company's motion for summary judgment was denied.
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Taylor, No. 06-P-1037,
APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, July 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When defendant waived a jury and admitted facts supporting her convictions, but did not plead guilty, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 218, § 26A did not require the trial court to tell her she could revoke her jury waiver or be tried before a different judge because no statute or court rule imposed such an obligation without a request by defendant or counsel.
|
|||||
| Cotter v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, Opinion No.: 98828, Docket Number: 06-1651B,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT WORCESTER, July 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff's appeal of decision by state registry of motor vehicles and its appeals board to impose lifetime suspension of his driving privileges under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 90, § 24(1)(c) was untimely under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 31, § 44 as plaintiff, instead of filing an appeal to the court within 30 days, filed second appeal to board 11 months later.
|
|||||
| Garcia v. Federics, Opinion No.: 99087, Docket Number: 2004-00576,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT MIDDLESEX, July 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment motion was granted as negligence claim failed since neither standard form agreement for construction project nor standard form of architect's services assigned responsibility to architect or structural engineer for safety issues, and they did not have contractual duty to protect worker against unsafe working conditions.
|
|||||
| Lallo v. Szabo, Opinion No.: 99092, Docket Number: 2006-02910,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT MIDDLESEX, July 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Upper unit condominium owners' motion for summary judgment was granted because in opposing upper unit owners' proposed changes to unit, the lower unit condominium owners put the matter in "dispute." In light of the shared 50 percent ownership each party had in the property, if one unit owner/trustee disagreed to changes, arbitration had to follow.
|
|||||
| Bennett v. Pops, Opinion No.: 99079, Docket Number: 06-3606,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT MIDDLESEX, July 10, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A shareholder derivative action was dismissed because the shareholder failed to make a demand on the corporation's board of directors prior to filing suit and failed to make specific factual allegations that irreparable injury would result if such a demand was made; an analogy to an unrelated action was speculative and insufficient.
|
|||||
| McGregor v. Allamerica Ins. Co., SJC-09735,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, July 10, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insured was not entitled to summary judgment in action seeking a defense from his insurer in an underlying action for cleanup costs ordered under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 21E, § 5 related to an oil spill because oil leaking into the ground from a furnace tank supply line could reasonably be considered a pollutant; thus, the pollution exclusion applied.
|
|||||
| Rodriguez v. Parks & Woolson Mach. Co., Opinion No.: 98953, Docket Number: 1997-0831,
SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT WORCESTER, July 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant, as a defaulted party, was precluded from introducing evidence of plaintiff's comparative negligence at the hearing to assess damages under Mass. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2) because, by failing to defend the action, defendant elected to give up that affirmative defense which it had pled in its answer.
|
|||||
| Terra Nova Ins. Co. v. Fray-Witzer, SJC-09801,
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, July 10, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Unsolicited facsimile ads sent to Massachusetts residents by a New Jersey company, allegedly violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 47 U.S.C.S. § 227, were not "accidents," for insurance purposes, but the sender's insurer had to defend and indemnify the sender because the ads violated recipients' privacy right, triggering coverage.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
