running rule (Massachusetts) · Go Syfert
← Massachusetts issues

running rule in Massachusetts

5 Massachusetts opinions name it 2 courts 1990–2012 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Massachusetts courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Barry v. Commonwealthgreen
mass · 1983 · cited in 2 Massachusetts opinions naming this issue, 1998–2007
2 sentences

2007Commonwealth v. Spaulding, 411 Mass. 503 , 505 n.4 (1992), citing Barry v. Commonwealth, 390 Mass. 285, 294 (1983).

1998“The filing of a motion to dismiss tolls the running of rule 36 time.” Id. at 505 n.4, citing Barry v. Commonwealth, 390 Mass. 285, 294 (1983).

22
Commonwealth v. Spauldinggreen
mass · 1992 · cited in 2 Massachusetts opinions naming this issue, 2007–2011
2 sentences

2011See Commonwealth v. Spaulding, 411 Mass. at 505 n.4.

2007Commonwealth v. Spaulding, 411 Mass. 503 , 505 n.4 (1992), citing Barry v. Commonwealth, 390 Mass. 285, 294 (1983).

12
Commonwealth v. Juddgreen
massappct · 1987 · cited in 1 Massachusetts opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
1 sentence

2012See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Judd, 25 Mass. App. Ct. 921, 923 (1987).

11
FOMMONWEALTH v. McDonaldgreen
massappct · 1986 · cited in 1 Massachusetts opinions naming this issue, 1990–1990
1 sentence

1990There is no dispute between the government and the defendants that the 146 days running from the first filing of pretrial motions (May 6, 1988) through thirty days after the conclusion of hearings (September 28, 1988) are deductible from the period following arraignment. 9 Excludability on those grounds is discussed in Commonwealth v. McDonald, 21 Mass. App. Ct. 368, 371-374 (1986).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Where else courts name it

MA 5 (1990–2012) PA 4 (1982–1985) MS 4 (1931–1992) TX 3 (1992–2013) CA 3 (1966–2023) MO 3 (1869–1964) AL 2 (2004–2009) NM 2 (1963–2010)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check