Posts tagged "ConcordCarlyle"

Leder v. Superintendent of Schools of Concord & Concord-Carlyle Regional School District, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-095-13)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.  If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA 02108-1750;  (617) 557-1030;     SJC‑11224   PAUL LEDER[1]  vs.  SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS OF CONCORD & CONCORD-CARLYLE REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT & others.[2]     Middlesex.     February 7, 2013.  ‑  May 31, 2013. Present:  Ireland, C.J., Spina, Cordy, Botsford, Gants, Duffly, & Lenk, JJ.     School and School District.  School and School Committee, Superintendent of schools, Regional school district.  Municipal Corporations, Contracts.  Contract, Bidding for contract, Regional school district.  Injunction.  Practice, Civil, Preliminary injunction.  State Ethics Commission.  Conflict of Interest.       Civil action commenced in the Superior Court Department on August 15, 2011.   A motion for preliminary injunctive relief was heard by Garry V. Inge, J.   A petition for interlocutory review was heard in the Appeals Court by Elspeth B. Cypher, J.  The Supreme Judicial Court on its own initiative transferred the case from the Appeals Court.       Kwabena B. Abboa-Offei for the plaintiff. Adam Simms for the defendants. Andrew P. Botti & David K. Moynihan, for David K. Moynihan & another, amici curiae, submitted a brief. Martha Coakley, Attorney General, & Deirdre Roney, Special Assistant Attorney General, for State Ethics Commission, amicus curiae, submitted a brief.   GANTS, J.  The issue on appeal is whether, under G. L. c. 268A, § 21 (a), as appearing in by St. 2009, c. 28, § 80, a party may obtain declaratory or injunctive relief rescinding an action taken by a municipal agency based on an alleged violation of G. L. c. 268A, § 23, where the State Ethics Commission (commission) has made no finding of a violation and where the municipal agency has not requested this relief.  We conclude that a finding of a violation of § 23 by the commission after an adjudicatory proceeding and a request for rescission by the municipal agency are both prerequisites to the filing of a complaint seeking rescission under G. L. c. 268A, § 21 (a).  Because neither prerequisite has been met in this case, we affirm the denial of the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction and remand the case to the Superior Court with instructions to dismiss the complaint.[3]   Background.  The facts are not materially in dispute.  The plaintiff, Paul Leder, doing business as Spencer Brook Strings (SBS), operates a musical instrument sale and rental business that rents string instruments to students in various school districts throughout Massachusetts, including the Concord public schools and the Concord-Carlisle Regional School District (collectively, school district).  Since […]


Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - June 1, 2013 at 4:52 am

Categories: News   Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,