Free Newsletter
Civil practice – SLAPP – Abuse of process
Where a plaintiff filed a special motion under the anti-SLAPP statute to dismiss an abuse of process counterclaim, that motion should have been allowed because the defendant has not demonstrated that the underlying lawsuit is devoid of any reasonable factual support or arguable legal basis.
Attorneys – Fees – SLAPP
Where (1) a plaintiff sued his employer for violations of the Wage Act, (2) the employer’s counterclaims for abuse of process and malicious prosecution were dismissed pursuant to the anti-SLAPP statute, (3) the plaintiff thereafter sought appellate counsel fees and costs for the anti-SLAPP work, and (4) an Appeals Court panel halved the fee award because it concluded the award was disproportiona[...]
Fee reduction under SLAPP reversed on appeal
The Supreme Judicial Court has reversed a decision to reduce an appellate counsel fee request by an employee who brought suit under the Wage Act and successfully moved under the anti-SLAPP statute to dismiss the employer’s counterclaims for abuse of process and malicious prosecution.
Criminal – Sentencing – Large-capacity firearm or feeding device
Where two defendants, after pleading guilty to violating G.L.c. 269, §10(m), which prohibits the unlawful possession of a large-capacity firearm or feeding device, were each sentenced to from one year to one year and one day in state prison, the defendants' sentences are both unlawful, as the sentencing range for a violation of §10(m) requires a maximum term of incarceration of at least two and [...]
Appeals – G.L.c. 211, §3
Where a Juvenile Court judge issued a temporary order placing a petitioner's child in the custody of the Department of Children and Families, it was not error for a single justice to deny the petitioner’s request for relief under G.L.c. 211, §3, as the petitioner had an adequate alternative remedy available to him in the Appeals Court.
Attorneys – Bar counsel – Compensation rates
Where the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS) has asked for a determination that state court judges are authorized to increase compensation rates for bar advocates above levels set by the Legislature, the requested relief should be denied because CPCS has not demonstrated the existence of extraordinary circumstances that would justify the judicial intervention it seeks.
Landlord and tenant – Assisted living residence – Intake fee
Where a complaint was filed challenging a “community fee” charged by a defendant assisted living residence (ALR), the defendant should have been awarded summary judgment because the fee corresponds to the defendant's provision of ALR-specific intake services to the members of the plaintiff class.
Criminal – Psychiatric examination
Where (1) a defendant who moved for resentencing retained an expert who conducted a psychological examination and provided a report to the commonwealth based on that examination, (2) the commonwealth then moved for a reciprocal court-ordered psychiatric examination by its own expert, and (3) after a Superior Court judge allowed the commonwealth’s motion, the defendant filed a petition seeking re[...]
Charter schools subject to public records law
Charter schools in Massachusetts must comply with the commonwealth’s public records law, G.L.c. 66, §10, the Supreme Judicial Court has ruled.
Education – Public records – Charter school
Where Mystic Valley Regional Charter School refused to comply with multiple public records requests, a Superior Court judgment in favor of the attorney general in an enforcement action should be affirmed because a charter school qualifies as an “authority established by the general court to serve a public purpose” and therefore falls squarely within the class of governmental entities expressly[...]
Criminal – Pretrial detention – Armed robbery
Where (1) a defendant was charged with armed robbery and (2) the commonwealth filed a motion for pretrial detention, a judge’s decision to allow the commonwealth’s motion must be vacated because armed robbery does not qualify as a predicate offense under the force clause in G.L.c. 276, §58A(1).
Criminal – Murder
Where a defendant was convicted of first-degree murder, the defendant’s conviction should be affirmed despite his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence of deliberate premeditation.
Verdicts & Settlements
- Injury during baby’s adenoidectomy leads to stroke
- Construction worker’s hand caught in cement mixer
- Worker trapped in freezer, dies during steam cleaning
- Pedestrian, 69, hit by motor vehicle while in crosswalk
- Four-vehicle pileup leaves driver with spinal cord injury
- Nursing home staff blamed for kidney-failure death
- Pharmacy’s late delivery blamed for patient’s death
- Man, 25, drowns after swimming lesson at fitness club
Opinion Digests
- Jurisdiction – Forum selection clause – Non-signatory
- Criminal – Responsibility
- Attorneys – Lien
- Landlord and tenant – Default judgment
- Zoning – Constructive grant – Comprehensive permit
- Fraud – False Claims Act – Settlement share
- Civil practice – Discovery – Cybersecurity
