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.
SJC Opinions
Cousineau v. Commonwealth (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-030-13)
Defendant cannot appeal single justice's denial of interlocutory appeal application; remedy is to raise suppression issue on direct appeal after conviction.
Serrazina v. Springfield Public Schools (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-027-13)
School adjustment counselor suspended without pay following federal indictment, then terminated. Arbitrator ordered reinstatement; court awarded back pay for suspension period only.
Commonwealth v. Castillo (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-028-13)
Affirmed discovery order requiring Commonwealth to disclose follow-up medical visit information in its possession regarding sexual assault victims.
Commonwealth v. Harris (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-026-13)
Murder conviction affirmed. Self-defense instruction proper despite general language on provocation. 911 recording and prosecutor's use thereof admissible.
Commonwealth v. Kelsey (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-018-13)
Probationer denied disclosure of confidential informant's identity before revocation hearing. Court held disclosure may be required where informant is sole nongovernmental witness and active participant in alleged offense.
Chambers, et al. v. Gold Medal Bakery, Inc., et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-020-13)
Minority shareholders and directors of a family-held bakery sought privileged communications regarding litigation. The court held that because the shareholders pursued buyout claims adverse to the corporation's interests, they could not access litigation documents protected by attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine.
Rivas v. Chelsea Housing Authority (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-021-13)
Reversal of housing authority's termination of rental voucher for failure to report household composition change where authority failed to provide required settlement conference and applicable regulations impermissibly vague.
Commonwealth v. Figueroa (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-023-13)
Parole officer investigation into potential parole violations qualifies as criminal proceeding under witness tampering statute protecting parole officers and those with information about violations.
L.J.S. v. J.E.S. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-024-13)
Judges must consider federal tax consequences of alimony provisions when parties present evidence, even where tax treatment remains uncertain under federal law.