relaxation rule (Massachusetts) · Go Syfert
← Massachusetts issues

relaxation rule in Massachusetts

5 Massachusetts opinions name it 2 courts 1934–2008 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 (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Commonwealth v. Stuckichgreen
mass · 2008 · cited in 1 Massachusetts opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008If so, “that is the end of the matter.” Id. at 456 .

2008Contrary to that suggestion, however, in Commonwealth v. Murungu, 450 Mass. at 446 , the court explained that “these exceptions to the first complaint doctrine” do not amount to a relaxation of the rule “so that the Commonwealth may pick and choose among various complaint witnesses to locate the one with the most complete memory, the one to whom the complainant related the most details, or the one who is likely to be the most effective witness.” Additionally, in Commonwealth v. Stuckich, 450 Mass. 449, 455-456 (2008), the court held that a letter written by the complainant can and should be co

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
Commonwealth v. Murungu green
mass · 2008
1 sentence

2008Contrary to that suggestion, however, in Commonwealth v. Murungu, 450 Mass. at 446 , the court explained that “these exceptions to the first complaint doctrine” do not amount to a relaxation of the rule “so that the Commonwealth may pick and choose among various complaint witnesses to locate the one with the most complete memory, the one to whom the complainant related the most details, or the one who is likely to be the most effective witness.” Additionally, in Commonwealth v. Stuckich, 450 Mass. 449, 455-456 (2008), the court held that a letter written by the complainant can and should be co

12008–2008
Rita E. Shaw v. Edward Hines Lumber Co. green
ca7 · 1957
1 sentence

1989Cf. Shaw v. Edward Hines Lumber Co., 249 F.2d 434 (7th Cir. 1957); First Safe Deposit Natl.

11989–1989
Commonwealth v. Stone green
mass · 1974
1 sentence

1975Commonwealth v. Stone, 366 Mass. 506 (1974).

11975–1975
Commonwealth v. Costello green
mass · 1876
1 sentence

1935In Commonwealth v. Costello, 121 Mass. 371 , it was held that the rule did not apply to a hearing on a motion for a new trial.

11935–1935
Bowditch v. Andrew green
mass · 1864
1 sentence

1934Bowditch v. Andrew, 8 Allen, 339 .

11934–1934

Where else courts name it

IL 36 (1900–2025) NJ 25 (1901–2024) NY 24 (1850–1983) CA 16 (1919–2020) PA 16 (1954–2023) TX 14 (1911–2021) MO 10 (1894–2015) MS 9 (1916–1999) AL 9 (1847–2009) MD 8 (1852–2001) NC 5 (1919–1992) MA 5 (1934–2008) VA 5 (1883–1920) WV 4 (1887–1932) RI 4 (1954–2009) MI 4 (1853–1980) MN 3 (1907–1978) FL 3 (1886–1995) NH 3 (1902–1904) TN 3 (1981–1996) ME 3 (1877–2016) IN 3 (1847–1877) WY 3 (1998–2002) IA 2 (1893–1980) CO 2 (1895–1911) OR 2 (1938–1938) DE 2 (1927–1984) NE 2 (1904–1964) AZ 2 (1964–2006) OK 2 (1924–1951) MT 2 (1933–1991) GA 2 (1924–1942) AR 2 (1887–1904)

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