Kimbroughtillery v. Commonwealth (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-085-15)
Collateral estoppel bars Commonwealth from relitigating probation violation on same facts previously resolved in defendant's favor in different district court.
Weekly
Felix F. v. Commonwealth (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-086-15)
Juvenile prosecution as youthful offender requires evidence of explicit or implicit threat of serious bodily harm, not merely generalized potential for harm from heroin distribution.
Commonwealth v. Colon (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-053-15)
Detective had reasonable suspicion to stop defendant based on nervous demeanor, rapid departure, bulge consistent with firearm, and high-crime neighborhood.
Commonwealth v. Magdalenski (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-084-15)
Defendant improperly barred from cross-examining witnesses about bias and motive to fabricate testimony. Reversal and new trial ordered.
Vale v. Valchuis, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-083-15)
Stock valuation agreement between close corporation shareholders constitutes valid arbitration clause under Massachusetts Arbitration Act if actual controversy exists regarding price.
Borden v. Progressive Direct Insurance Company (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-052-15)
Personal auto insurance policy's exclusion for automobile business applies to towing company employee using nonowned tow truck in course of employment.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Cook, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-051-15)
Face-to-face meeting requirement in FHA-insured mortgage is condition precedent to foreclosure; material facts remain about meeting's compliance.
Commonwealth v. Tarjick (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-050-15)
Memory cards seized during search warrant execution were properly admitted under plain view doctrine despite not being listed in original warrant.
Bridgeman v. District Attorney for the Suffolk District, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-082-15)
Defendants who plead guilty in drug cases based on tainted analysis cannot face more serious charges or harsher sentences upon obtaining new trials.
Commonwealth v. Tavares (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-080-15)
Murder conviction reversed on joint venture theory where judge's response to jury question about liability of aiders and abettors created miscarriage of justice risk.