Search for: "G.L. " Results 201 - 220 of 543
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Mar 2016, 2:33 pm
"Stanfield promptly spoke to police and filed a request for a harassment prevention order under G.L. c. 258, section 3 in the District Court. [read post]
30 Mar 2016, 2:33 pm
"Stanfield promptly spoke to police and filed a request for a harassment prevention order under G.L. c. 258, section 3 in the District Court. [read post]
30 Mar 2016, 2:33 pm
"Stanfield promptly spoke to police and filed a request for a harassment prevention order under G.L. c. 258, section 3 in the District Court. [read post]
28 Mar 2016, 9:16 am by Pulgini & Norton, LLP
The defendant filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, which was denied by the judge and ultimately reversed by the appeals court, which concluded that the enactment of G.L. c. 185, § 3A deprived the Housing Court of subject matter jurisdiction. [read post]
20 Mar 2016, 7:18 am by Law Offices of Jeffrey S. Glassman
However, the Massachusetts Court of Appeals reversed in part, as it related to violation of G.L. c. 176D, Section 3(9)(f). [read post]
17 Mar 2016, 9:49 am by Pulgini & Norton, LLP
Pursuant to G.L. 152 § 1(7A), the aggravation or exacerbation of a pre-existing, non-industrial, medical condition causing a disability, or a need for treatment, is compensable under the Workers’ Compensation Act only to the extent the compensable injury remains a major cause of the employee’s disability or need for treatment. [read post]
14 Mar 2016, 9:05 am by Pulgini & Norton, LLP
Pursuant to G.L. c. 240, § 14A, a landowner may obtain a judgment from the Land Court as to the validity of a municipal zoning ordinance or bylaw, to the extent that it may affect a proposed use or development of such land. [read post]
9 Mar 2016, 12:16 pm by Heidi A. Nadel
Levine, ruled that parties to an arbitration agreement that is subject to the Massachusetts Arbitration Act, G.L. c. 251 ("MAA"), cannot contract around the "exclusive grounds" for judicial review set forth in the MAA.The Court concluded that the statute's plain language, legislative intent and policy considerations of preserving arbitration as "an expeditious and reliable alternative to litigation" all supported its decision. [read post]
9 Mar 2016, 12:16 pm by Heidi A. Nadel
Levine, ruled that parties to an arbitration agreement that is subject to the Massachusetts Arbitration Act, G.L. c. 251 ("MAA"), cannot contract around the "exclusive grounds" for judicial review set forth in the MAA.The Court concluded that the statute's plain language, legislative intent and policy considerations of preserving arbitration as "an expeditious and reliable alternative to litigation" all supported its decision. [read post]
9 Mar 2016, 12:16 pm by Heidi A. Nadel
Levine, ruled that parties to an arbitration agreement that is subject to theMassachusetts Arbitration Act, G.L. c. 251("MAA"), cannot contract around the "exclusive grounds" for judicial review set forth in the MAA.The Court concluded that the statute's plain language, legislative intent and policy considerations of preserving arbitration as "an expeditious and reliable alternative to litigation" all supported its decision. [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 11:27 am by Heidi A. Nadel
Julie GallagherSJC-12018Parentage of woman whose same-sex partner gave birth to two children while the two women were a couple and had agreed to have children togetherKaren Partanen filed a Verified Complaint in Equity purusant to G.L. c. 215, § 6, G.L. c. 209C, and G.L. c. 46, § 4B, in which she asked the family and probate court to declare her to be the full legal parent of the two minor children born through assisted reproductive technology to her same-sex… [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 11:27 am by Heidi A. Nadel
Julie GallagherSJC-12018Parentage of woman whose same-sex partner gave birth to two children while the two women were a couple and had agreed to have children togetherKaren Partanen filed a Verified Complaint in Equity purusant to G.L. c. 215, § 6, G.L. c. 209C, and G.L. c. 46, § 4B, in which she asked the family and probate court to declare her to be the full legal parent of the two minor children born through assisted reproductive technology to her same-sex… [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 11:27 am by Heidi A. Nadel
Julie GallagherSJC-12018Parentage of woman whose same-sex partner gave birth to two children while the two women were a couple and had agreed to have children togetherKaren Partanen filed a Verified Complaint in Equity purusant to G.L. c. 215, § 6, G.L. c. 209C, and G.L. c. 46, § 4B, in which she asked the family and probate court to declare her to be the full legal parent of the two minor children born through assisted reproductive technology to… [read post]
25 Feb 2016, 9:44 am by Pulgini & Norton, LLP
Specifically, pursuant to G.L. c. 152, § 15, when an employee recovers damages from a third party, the workers’ compensation insurer is statutorily entitled to a lien on the recovery in the amount that the insurer paid to the employee in benefits. [read post]
21 Feb 2016, 9:16 pm by Patricia Salkin
The Appeals Court reversed the judge’s order denying the defendants’ motion to dismiss, concluding that the enactment of G.L. c. 185, § 3A, deprived the Housing Court of subject matter jurisdiction over major development permit appeals. [read post]
20 Feb 2016, 11:41 am by Daniel Cappetta
Claiming an inviolable statutory right to tender a defendant-capped plea on the day of trial,” Charbonneau sought relief from the single justice of the SJC, pursuant to G.L. c.211, §3. [read post]
15 Feb 2016, 12:27 pm by Pulgini & Norton, LLP
The Massachusetts Land Court recently issued a ruling in a real estate dispute involving zoning relief pursuant to G.L. c. 40A, § 6. [read post]
4 Feb 2016, 9:39 am by Pulgini & Norton, LLP
On appeal to the court, the employee invoked G.L. c. 152, section 14(1) against his employer’s insurer, contending that it wrongfully failed to pay benefits on his previous claims. [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 9:33 am by Pulgini & Norton, LLP
However, the appeals court noted that the Land Court specifically entered findings under G.L. c. 40A, § 6, stating that the expansion of the permitted use in the 2009 amendment to the 1995 business storage permit would not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the prior permitted use. [read post]