HipSaver, Inc. v. Kiel (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-039-13)
Commercial disparagement claim against researcher fails where plaintiff cannot prove statements were false, applied to its product, or caused its losses.
SJC Opinions
E.C.O. v. Compton (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-040-13)
Father sought abuse prevention order against adult in electronic dating relationship with his minor daughter. Court found substantive dating relationship but no statutory abuse.
Morales v. Morales (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-037-13)
Child support order modification governed by inconsistency standard, not material and substantial change standard. Remanded for reconsideration under proper legal test.
Tyler v. Michaels Stores, Inc. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-036-13)
Zip codes constitute personal identification information under the consumer privacy statute. A plaintiff may sue for statutory violation absent identity fraud but must prove resulting injury to recover damages.
Commonwealth v. Jules (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-034-13)
First-degree murder conviction affirmed. Unrecorded police statements admissible with reliable translator; eyewitness identification from newspaper photo not suppressed.
Edwards, petitioner (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-035-13)
Judge may determine reasonable expert compensation for indigent party by assessing efficiency of work performed but cannot reduce hourly rate set by Committee for Public Counsel Services.
Premier Capital, LLC v. KMZ, Inc. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-033-13)
Sealed promissory note subject to 20-year statute of limitations when cause of action accrued before 1998 UCC enactment. Successor liability requires actual asset transfer, not just business similarity.
Dixon v. City of Malden (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-032-13)
Employer cannot use later salary continuation payments to satisfy Wage Act obligation to pay accrued vacation on employee's termination date.
Commonwealth v. Ahart (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-031-13)
Conviction for murder affirmed where trial judge properly limited cross-examination, police testimony was corroborating not vouching, and prosecutor's closing argument fairly presented evidence.
Azubuko v. Commonwealth (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-029-13)
Pro se interlocutory appeal by represented defendant denied; party with counsel cannot ordinarily challenge trial rulings pro se absent extraordinary circumstances.