Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
28 Massachusetts opinions name it 3 courts 1991–2023 1 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Davis-Wilson v. Hilton Hotels Corp.green2 sentences2023P. 4 (j). "'Good cause' has been defined as 'a stringent standard requiring diligen[t]' albeit unsuccessful effort to complete service within the period prescribed by the rule." Shuman, 30 Mass. App. Ct. at 953 , quoting Davis–Wilson v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 106 F.R.D. 505, 509 (E.D. 2015The well-established definition of Rule 40 “good cause” is that it is a ‘“stringent standard requiring diligen [t] ’ albeit unsuccessful effort to complete service within the period prescribed by the rule.” Id., quoting Davis-Wilson v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 106 F.R.D. 505, 509 (E.D.La. 1985). | 15 | 15 |
Shuman v. Stanley Worksgreen2 sentences2023P. 4 (j). "'Good cause' has been defined as 'a stringent standard requiring diligen[t]' albeit unsuccessful effort to complete service within the period prescribed by the rule." Shuman, 30 Mass. App. Ct. at 953 , quoting Davis–Wilson v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 106 F.R.D. 505, 509 (E.D. 2019"Good cause is 'a stringent standard requiring diligent albeit unsuccessful effort to complete service within the period prescribed by the rule.'" Commissioner of Revenue v. Carrigan, 45 Mass. App. Ct. 309, 311 (1998), quoting Shuman v. Stanley Works, 30 Mass. App. Ct. 951, 953 (1991) (internal quotation marks omitted). | 14 | 20 |
Hull v. Attleboro Savings Bankgreen2 sentences2009Bank, 33 Mass.App.Ct. 18 (1992), the court said [at 26]: “Good cause” is “a stringent standard requiring diligent albeit unsuccessful effort to complete service within the period prescribed by the rule.” Shu man v. Stanley Works, supra at 953, quoting from Davis-Wilson v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 106 P.R.D. 505, 509 (E.D.La. 1985). 2006Good cause is “ ‘a stringent standard requiring diligent’ albeit unsuccessful effort to complete service within the period prescribed by the rule.” Hull v. Attleboro Savings Bank, 33 Mass.App.Ct. 18, 26 (1992), quoting Davis-Wilson v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 106 F.R.D. 505, 509 (E.D.La. 1985). | 6 | 7 |
Commissioner of Revenue v. Carrigangreen2 sentences2019"Good cause is 'a stringent standard requiring diligent albeit unsuccessful effort to complete service within the period prescribed by the rule.'" Commissioner of Revenue v. Carrigan, 45 Mass. App. Ct. 309, 311 (1998), quoting Shuman v. Stanley Works, 30 Mass. App. Ct. 951, 953 (1991) (internal quotation marks omitted). 2018"Good cause is a stringent standard requiring diligen[t] albeit unsuccessful effort to complete service within the period prescribed by the rule." Commissioner of Rev . v. Carrigan , 45 Mass. App. Ct. 309 , 311 (1998) (quotation omitted). | 5 | 8 |
Shihshu Walter Wei v. State of Hawaiigreen2 sentences2015“The only example of good cause provided by the legislative history is the obvious one of a defendant’s evasion of service.” Id., quoting Wei v. State, 763 F.2d 370, 371 (9th Cir. 1985). 2009La. 1985). ‘The only example of good cause provided by the legislative history is the obvious one of a defendant’s evasion of service.” Shuman v. The Stanley Works, 30 Mass. App. Ct. 951, 953 (1991), quoting Wei v. State of Hawaii, 763 F.2d 370, 371 (9th Cir. 1985), and citing Lovelace v.Acme Mkts., Inc., 820 F.2d 81, 84 (3d Cir. 1987). | 2 | 2 |
Nett v. Belluccigreen1 sentence2018See Nett v. Bellucci , 437 Mass. 630 , 640 n.8 (2002). | 1 | 1 |
Kennedy v. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Inc.green1 sentence2009Ctr., 73 Mass. App. Ct. 459, 464-465 (2009) (“good cause” standard is “stringent standard requiring diligent, albeit unsuccessful efforts to complete service within the period prescribed by the rule”). | 1 | 1 |
Sheldon Lovelace v. Acme Markets, Incgreen1 sentence2009La. 1985). ‘The only example of good cause provided by the legislative history is the obvious one of a defendant’s evasion of service.” Shuman v. The Stanley Works, 30 Mass. App. Ct. 951, 953 (1991), quoting Wei v. State of Hawaii, 763 F.2d 370, 371 (9th Cir. 1985), and citing Lovelace v.Acme Mkts., Inc., 820 F.2d 81, 84 (3d Cir. 1987). | 1 | 1 |
Pereira v. Imperial Savings Ass'ngreen1 sentence2000See also Pereira v. Imperial Savings Assn., 1993 Mass. App. Div. 62, 63 . | 1 | 1 |
Heacock v. Heacockgreen1 sentence1997La. 1985); see also Hull v. Attleboro Savings Bank, 33 Mass.App.Ct. 18, 26 (1992) (stating good cause exception applies only where party had made diligent effort to effect timely service); Heacock v. Heacock, 30 Mass.App.Ct. 304, 305 (1991) (recognizing plaintiff may prevent Rule 4(j) dismissal only upon showing of good cause). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Maloney v. Maloney
green
1 sentence2009“Good cause” has been defined as “‘a stringent standard requiring diligenjt]’ albeit unsuccessful efforts to complete service within the period prescribed by the rule.” Maloney v. Maloney, 2004 Mass. App. Div. 189 , quoting Davis-Wilson v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 106 F.R.D. 505, 509 (E.D. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
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.