Cases

417 Mass. 388 (1994) 630 N.E.2d 586 BEVERLY FOLMSBEE vs. TECH TOOL GRINDING & SUPPLY, INC., & another.[1] Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Berkshire. January 6, 1994. March 31, 1994. Present: LIACOS, C.J., WILKINS, ABRAMS, LYNCH, & O'CONNOR, JJ. *389 Thomas J. Curle

Moriarty, J. This is a civil action which was originally commenced in five counts. On September 6, 1991, summary judgment was entered for the defendants by another justice of this court (Simons J.) on Counts IV and V by agreement, and on Counts II and III over the objection of the plaintiff. The case came on for trial before me on the remaining count (Count I) during the April sitting of the court in Pittsfield. In Count I the pl

2 F.Supp.2d 128 (1998) Christopher FRENCH, Plaintiff, v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., Defendant. No. Civ.A. 97-10777-GAO. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. April 7, 1998. *129 *130 Litigant's Attorney, Alan S. Fanger, Needham, MA, for Litigant Christopher French, plaintiff. <

639 F.Supp.2d 131 (2009) Scott RODRIGUES, Plaintiff, v. EG SYSTEMS, INC. d/b/a Scotts Lawnservice, Defendant. Civil Action No. 07-10104-GAO. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. July 23, 2009. *132 Harvey A. Schwartz, Lori A. Jodoin, Rodgers, Powers & Schwartz LLP, Boston, MA, for Plaintiff. Matthew R. Estab

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS SAYLOR, District Judge. This is an employment dispute arising out of an allegedly wrongful termination. Plaintiff Sandra Chacon alleges that defendants violated both the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. § 2611 et seq., and Massachusetts employment-discrimination law by terminating her from her position as a patient a

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as Lunsford v. Sterilite of Ohio, L.L.C., Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-4193.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any

574 F.3d 57 (2009) Geneva FINIGAN, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee, v. William E. MARSHALL, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Deputy Sheriff of the County of Saratoga, New York, Defendant-Counterclaimant-Appellant.[*] Docket No. 07-0964-cv. United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Argued: January 6, 2009. Decided: July 28, 2009

648 F.3d 50 (2011) Robert HAGGINS et al., Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. VERIZON NEW ENGLAND, INC., Defendant, Appellee. No. 10-2196. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. Submitted May 3, 2011. Decided July 27, 2011. *51 Alfred Gordon and Pyle Rome Ehrenberg, PC were on brief, for appellants. Arthur

107 P.3d 1165 (2005) Melynda SLAUGHTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JOHN ELWAY DODGE SOUTHWEST/AUTONATION, Defendant-Appellee. No. 03CA1346. Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. IV. January 13, 2005. *1167 Gregg C. McReynolds, LLC, Gregg C. McReynolds, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiff-Appellant. Holland & Hart LLP, Alan D. Schuc

Gants, J. The plaintiff, Donovan Harrison (“Harrison”) has filed suit against his employer Eldim, Inc. (“Eldim.”), its corporate parent — Interturbine Group of Companies (“Interturbine”), and his immediate supervisor — Donald Larsen (“Larsen”), alleging that they interfered with his right to privacy, in violation of G.L.c. 214, §1B, by compelling him to give a urine sample for drug analysis after he sought medical attention fol

Brady, J. The plaintiff, Brennan O’Donnell has asserted claims against the defendant, Richard Miller, for violation of his right to privacy (Count I) and constructive termination (Count II). Miller has asserted counterclaims against O’Donnell for breach of contract (Count I), conversion (Count II), invasion of privacy (Count III), and slander (Count IV). Miller now seeks partial summary judgment on Counts I and II of O’Donnell’s

Wilkins, CJ. The plaintiff, a former at-will employee of the defendant and a divorced single parent, appeals from the entry of summary judgment for the defendant. She asserts that the defendant discharged her when, because of the need to be with her young son, she was unwilling to work long hours. She argues that such a discharge is contrary to public policy and entitles her to damages. We granted the plaintiff’s application for

Burnes, J. This motion for summary judgment arises out of plaintiff James Foster’s action to require the defendant, Back Bay Spas, Inc., dba Healthworks Fitness Center, to allow him to join the health club. The club does not admit men. Foster argues that this policy violates G.L.c. 272, §§92A and 98 (“public accommodations statute”). For the reasons set forth below, the plaintiffs motion is ALLOWED. BACKGROUND<

196 F.Supp.2d 77 (2002) Paul BYRNE and Paul Macmillan, Individually, and in their official capacity as Presidents of the MBTA Police Patrol Officers' Association and the MBTA Police Sergeants' Association, respectively, Plaintiffs v. MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, Defendant No. CIV.A. 95-10837-GAO. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. April 18, 2002.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE May 7, 2008 Session STEVEN WATERS ET AL. v. REAGAN FARR, COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE FOR THE STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal by Permission from the Court of Appeals, Eastern Section Chancery Court for Loudon County No. 10710 Frank V. Williams, III, Chancellor

418 Mass. 425 (1994) 637 N.E.2d 203 JAMES A. WEBSTER & another[1] vs. MOTOROLA, INC., & others.[2] Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk. April 5, 1994. July 21, 1994. Present: LIACOS, C.J., ABRAMS, NOLAN, LYNCH, & GREANEY, JJ. *426 David A. Hoffman

VOLTERRA, J. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs, John Finlay (Finlay) and Charles Tamulonis (Tamulonis), brought this action against their former employer, defendant Fischbach and Moore, Inc. (Fischbach), and John G. Molnar (Molnar), a Fischbach supervisor, after Molnar terminated their employment with Fischbach. Defendants now move for summary judgment against both plaintiffs on all counts. Plaintiffs oppose the motio

63 F.Supp.2d 110 (1999) Victor E. SIMAS, Plaintiff, v. FIRST CITIZENS' FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, Barbara Silva, and Lisa Grace, Defendants. Civil Action No. 96-10073-RBC. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. August 30, 1999. *111 *112 Philip N. Beauregard, Beauregard & Burke, New Be

915 F.Supp. 476 (1996) Maura L. TIGHE, Plaintiff, v. CAREER SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Defendant. Civil Action No. 91-40185. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. February 9, 1996. *477 *478 Wendy A. Kaplan, Boston, MA, for Plaintiff. James W. Nagle, Bradford J. Smith, G

Gershengorn, J. Plaintiffs brought this action alleging claims of breach of contract and various torts stemming from the termination of or resignation from their employment relationship with the defendants.1 Plaintiffs claim that agents of the defendants made certain oral promises to them before and during their employment and that these promises constituted assurances of promotion. Defendants counter