The SJC ruled that mandamus relief was unavailable to a pro se litigant alleging clerk's office errors in docketing and providing copies of orders, because he had adequate alternative remedies through the trial court and normal appellate process.
Appeals Court holds that a Chapter 93A demand letter accusing Chelsea of unfair post-flood conduct did not satisfy MTCA presentment requirements for a negligence claim based on defective sewer pipes because it never mentioned the incident, negligence, or infrastructure.
The SJC affirmed summary judgment for a general contractor in a roofing fall case, holding the contractor owed no duty because it retained no control over the subcontractor's safety practices and did not hire the injured worker.
The SJC vacated a sex-offender classification after SORB denied funds for an expert to challenge whether multiple offenses predict dangerousness, holding the denial was an abuse of discretion.
The SJC held that two mid-century statutes diverted White Stadium's parcel from park use to school purposes, removing Article 97 protection decades before the provision was ratified in 1972.
Appeals Court holds that persistent, treatment-resistant premature ventricular contractions qualify as heart disease under the heart law, entitling a former police officer to a presumption that her disabling cardiac condition arose in the line of duty.
SJC affirms murder conviction where surveillance video showed defendant ambushed victim from behind. Court holds trial counsel's decision not to introduce victim's prior violent acts was reasonable strategy, not ineffective assistance.
Filzer v. Pitsick LLC (24-P-720, Rule 23.0 Decision, 2025) In what has to be one of the most expensive backyard disputes in recent Massachusetts memory, a panel of the Appeals Court just unanimously affirmed a Superior Court judgment that enforces…
Massachusetts SJC Shuts Down Another Post-Conviction Shortcut: Pike v. Divris (SJC-13811, November 18, 2025) The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) just dropped a crisp, four-page reminder that the extraordinary relief valve of G. L. c. 211, § 3 is not…
I. Issue Did the trial judge abuse his discretion in denying the defendant, Michael Noguera’s, motion for a new trial? Specifically, was Noguera’s trial counsel ineffective by failing to fully investigate and present evidence of his mental illness, or did…
