Superior Court

Three Pemberton Square
Boston, MA 02108

Phone: (617) 788-8130

Judicial Biography

Born:

1944

Year admitted to bar:

1969

Year appointed/elected:

2004, by Gov. Mitt Romney

Background

Education:

Boston College Law School, 1969
St. Peter’s College, 1966

Publications:

Co-Author, “Annual Survey of Labor Relations Law,” Vol. 10, Boston College Industrial and Commercial Law Review (1968-1969).

Professional

Legal Employment History:

Associate (1969-1974) and partner (1974-2004), Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo.

General Character of Law Practice Prior to Judgeship:

“Trial experience in state and federal courts in a variety of areas including intellectual property, class actions, consumer and business fraud, antitrust, securities litigation, employment law, intercompany stockholder disputes, and construction disputes.”

Civic and Community Activities

Appointive or Elective Positions Held:

Trustee, Boston Bar Foundation.

Memberships/Affiliations:

Massachusetts Bar Association;
Boston Bar Association;
American Bar Association;
Board of Directors and Finance Committee, Greater Boston YMCA

Reported Decisions
Other Links

Evaluations from Lawyers

4 = Excellent 3 = Good 2 = Fair 1 = Poor

	rating	averages for judges of this court	averages of all judges
Manages court time in a way that minimizes waiting around:	3.3	3.2	3.0
Is receptive to requests for continuances:	3.0	2.9	2.9
Is receptive to lawyers’ requests for jury instructions and voir dire questions:	3.0	3.2	3.1
Presents easy-to-follow and legally sound instructions to jury:	3.7	3.3	3.2
Gives lawyers an opportunity to be heard prior to making legal findings and rulings:	3.7	3.2	3.1
Explains decisions in a manner that is clear to litigants and jurors:	3.7	3.2	3.0
Addresses the following with respect
a) litigants and witnesses:	4.0	3.4	3.2
b) lawyers:	3.9	3.2	3.0
c) court staff:	3.9	3.6	3.5
Attentiveness:	3.7	3.4	3.2
Timeliness of orders, judgments and decisions:	3.4	3.2	3.2
Demonstrates knowledge of substantive law and rules of evidence:	3.1	3.0	3.0
Quality of written decisions:	3.0	2.8	2.9
Shows willingness to ignore
a) irrelevant considerations:	3.0	3.0	2.9
c) identity of lawyers or parties:	3.3	3.3	3.0
d) public pressure or outside interests:	4.0	3.4	3.2
Has ability to maintain control of courtroom:	3.7	3.5	3.4
Starts session on schedule and on time:	3.6	3.4	3.2
Shows an appropriate degree of preparedness:	3.4	3.2	3.1
Average Overall Rating:	3.5	3.2	3.1

	% Yes Answer	averages for judges of this court	averages of all judges
Regularly keeps sessions past 4 p.m.:	0	23	26
Allows lawyers to lobby their cases in chambers:	67	47	47
Is rigid follower of court-mandated time standards:	0	39	45
Behaves differently when cameras are in the courtroom:	0	21	24

Comments

1) The judge kept a courtroom full of lawyers waiting more than an hour on routine motions while indulging verbose pro se litigants in two separate cases, costing everyone’s clients unnecessarily.

The judge also needlessly scheduled a hearing on an unopposed motion several months after it was filed, resulting in unnecessary delays. Calls and letters to the clerk went unreturned and the judge admitted that the hearing was scheduled in error, but then held anyway (even after being continued by the court once) because notices had initially gone out. This was a collection case against a local company by an out of state investor – I could not help but feel that my client had been home-towned.

2) Prepare your written material well, and submit it ahead of time, because Judge Murtagh does review it prior to hearing.

3) He listens, he reads the material ahead of time, and he is a very clear thinker.

4) Be prepared on the law and the facts of the case well before trial.

5) Judge Murtaugh gave counsel an opportunity to speak with jurors in his presence after the case settled on the 5th day of trial. The experience was notable and worthwhile for counsel and the judge and should be permitted in at least all civil cases.

Judicial Profiles

Murtagh, Thomas R. (retired)