Court Court Rules Litigation Massachusetts 
JURIST
MAY 24, 2022
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) Monday denied ExxonMobil Corp.’s The Office of Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey released a statement following the SJC’s decision affirming the rejection of ExxonMobil’s “ anti-SLAPP ” motion to dismiss by the Suffolk Superior Court.
LawSites
FEBRUARY 22, 2024
Yet it happened again this week — and it happened not once, but in two separate cases, one in Missouri and the other in Massachusetts. In fairness, the Missouri case involved a pro se litigant, not a lawyer, but that pro se litigant claimed to have gotten the citations from a lawyer he hired through the internet.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
LegalReader
FEBRUARY 18, 2021
Massachusetts superior court rules woman's hospice claim can move forward.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
FEBRUARY 23, 2022
Starting in 2017, cities, counties, and states across the United States have filed claims (see here and here ) in state courts against fossil fuel companies seeking redress for the climate harms their products have caused. The vast majority of courts that have ruled on this issue have said the climate claims should remain in state court.
JonathanTurley
OCTOBER 30, 2023
On June 15, 2023, the court issued the ultimate judgment not only on the torts claims but perhaps the state of our politics. He ruled for both the claim of the Plaintiff and the counterclaim of the Defendant and denied any damages to either party. _ Again, the court agreed. In another June 2023 decision in Munoz v. Six Flags St.
SCOTUSBlog
OCTOBER 26, 2022
Share In 2003, the Supreme Court ruled in Grutter v. Both of the lawsuits were filed in federal court in 2014 by a group called Students for Fair Admissions, which describes itself as “dedicated to defending the right to racial equality in college admissions.” Two cases, two paths to the Supreme Court.
SCOTUSBlog
MAY 28, 2021
Share This week we highlight cert petitions that ask the Supreme Court to consider, among other things, the scope of the First Amendment — specifically, whether a law forbidding clandestine recordings is overbroad and whether a state may require individuals to carry identification cards labeled “SEX OFFENDER.” In Louisiana v.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
104 
Let's personalize your content