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.
13 Massachusetts opinions name it 4 courts 1971–2020 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Ross v. Rossgreen1 sentence2019The divorce statute is "intended to be for the benefit of our own citizens." Ross v. Ross, 103 Mass. 575, 576 (1870). 2 I note that there is no claim before us that the residency requirement violates the Massachusetts Constitution and Declaration of Rights. 5 While this means that the Legislature is free within constitutional limits not to protect people who claim to have connections with the Commonwealth but really have come here only to get divorced, assuming there are any individuals who would do that, presumably we do not want to remit our own citizens to a foreign divorce process unnecess | 1 | 1 |
Opinion of the Justices to the House of Representativesgreen1 sentence2006L. c. 112, § 12S, knowingly did not include a residency requirement. “[T]he omission ... of terms . . . may be deemed to be one of deliberate [l]egislat[ive] design. ‘So important a matter would hardly have been passed over in silence.’ Opinion of the Justices, 308 Mass. 601, 613 (1941).” Thomas v. Department of State Police, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 747, 754 (2004). | 1 | 1 |
Dartt v. Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc.green1 sentence2006See Dartt v. Browning-Ferris Indus., Inc. (Mass.), 427 Mass. 1, 9 (1998) (“[W]e will not add to a statute a word that the Legislature had the option to, but chose not to, include”); Commonwealth v. Clerk-Magistrate of the W. | 1 | 1 |
Thomas v. Department of State Policegreen1 sentence2006L. c. 112, § 12S, knowingly did not include a residency requirement. “[T]he omission ... of terms . . . may be deemed to be one of deliberate [l]egislat[ive] design. ‘So important a matter would hardly have been passed over in silence.’ Opinion of the Justices, 308 Mass. 601, 613 (1941).” Thomas v. Department of State Police, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 747, 754 (2004). | 1 | 1 |
Lee v. Commissioner of Revenuegreen1 sentence2005The residency requirement in the veterans’ exemption does “not rise to a level of interference with the right to travel that would justify the application of strict scrutiny,” Lee v. Commissioner of Revenue, 395 Mass. 527, 532 (1985), because the exemption neither imposes an impermissible “penalty” on the right to travel (as that term is used in Shapiro v. Thompson, supra, and related decisions), nor creates an impermissible classification (as that term is used in the Saenz v. Roe decision). | 1 | 1 |
Frost v. Commissioner of Corporations & Taxationgreen1 sentence2005See Frost v. Commissioner of Corps. & Taxation, 363 Mass. 235, 248 (1973). 2. | 1 | 1 |
Williams v. Vermontgreen1 sentence2005It recognizes that the plaintiff, as a taxpayer, has no right to a particular rate of taxation, and it is underpinned, as previously mentioned, by the well-settled law affording “States . . . large leeway in making classifications and drawing lines which in their judgment produce reasonable systems of taxation.” Williams v. Vermont, 472 U.S. 14, 22 (1985). | 1 | 1 |
Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.green1 sentence2004See Cohen, 389 Mass. 327 ; Nierman v. Hyatt Corp, 59 Mass.App.Ct. 844 (2003); Dasha v. Adelman, 45 Mass.App.Ct. 418 (1998). | 1 | 1 |
City of Boston v. Boston Police Patrolmen's Ass'ngreen1 sentence2003See Boston v. Boston Police Patrolmen’s Assn., Inc., 48 Mass. App. Ct. 74, 78 (1999). | 1 | 1 |
McCarthy v. Philadelphia Civil Service Commissiongreen1 sentence1986Commn., 424 U.S. 645, 646-647 (1976). | 1 | 1 |
Weinberger v. Salfigreen1 sentence1984Weinberger v. Salfi, 422 U.S. 749, 768-770 (1975). | 1 | 1 |
Strauss v. Alabama State Bargreen1 sentence1984See Strauss v. Alabama State Bar, 520 F. Supp. 173, 178-179 (N.D. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Custody of Victoria
green
1 sentence2020As the Supreme Judicial Court has explained, "[c]onsistent with the underlying purpose of [the MCCJA] to allow for uniform treatment of custody issues by an appropriate court, the statute creates an exception to the residency requirement if 4 A "petition to terminate [a] guardianship is a custody proceeding." Guardianship of Minor Children, 97 Mass. App. Ct. at 321. 11 Massachusetts would be the child's home State except that the child is absent from the State 'because of his or her removal or retention' by a person claiming custody and a parent . . . continues to reside in the Commonwealth." | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Commonwealth v. Santaliz
green
1 sentence2011Here, when Sergeant Tynan arrested the defendant, although he suspected that the defendant was a resident of Massachusetts for various reasons, he had not conducted an investigation into the matter or obtained any of the relevant determinative information under and pursuant to § 3 ½. 12 Consequently, Sergeant Tynan did not base his decision to arrest on information that was “definite and substantial,” Commonwealth v. Santaliz, supra, in the context of the confines of the statutory scheme, in particular, G. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Hodas v. Morin
green
1 sentence2006We find Hodas v. Morin, 442 Mass. 544 (2004), instructive here. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Saenz v. Roe
green
2 sentences2005With these considerations in mind, we take up the issues. (a) The plaintiff argues that the residency requirement in the veterans’ exemption burdens his right to travel in violation of both the equal protection and privileges or immunities clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 9 Relying on Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) (and related decisions), and Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999), the plaintiff maintains that the residency requirement in the veterans’ exemption requires, and fails, a strict scrutiny analysis. 10 The plaintiff also posits, if the lat 2005In Saenz v. Roe, supra, the United States Supreme Court struck down a provision in the California Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program limiting otherwise qualifying new residents, for the first year of their residence in California, to the monetary welfare benefits they would have received in the State of their prior residence, if those benefits were lower than California’s. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Shapiro v. Thompson
green
1 sentence2005With these considerations in mind, we take up the issues. (a) The plaintiff argues that the residency requirement in the veterans’ exemption burdens his right to travel in violation of both the equal protection and privileges or immunities clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 9 Relying on Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) (and related decisions), and Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999), the plaintiff maintains that the residency requirement in the veterans’ exemption requires, and fails, a strict scrutiny analysis. 10 The plaintiff also posits, if the lat | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Dasha v. Adelman
green
1 sentence2004See Cohen, 389 Mass. 327 ; Nierman v. Hyatt Corp, 59 Mass.App.Ct. 844 (2003); Dasha v. Adelman, 45 Mass.App.Ct. 418 (1998). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Nierman v. Hyatt Corp.
green
1 sentence2004See Cohen, 389 Mass. 327 ; Nierman v. Hyatt Corp, 59 Mass.App.Ct. 844 (2003); Dasha v. Adelman, 45 Mass.App.Ct. 418 (1998). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Kraut v. Rachford
green
2 sentences2004The only decision the parties have identified that addresses the constitutionally required procedure for a school residency determination is Kraut, supra, 51 Ill.App.3d at 212-17 . 2004The only decision the parties have identified that addresses the constitutionally required procedure for a school residency determination is Kraut, supra, 51 Ill.App.3d at 212-17 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Mathews v. Diaz
green
1 sentence2001The Commissioner argues that this residency requirement was authorized by the 1996 Act and, therefore, under the Supreme Court’s decision in Matthews v. Diaz, 426 U.S. 67 (1976), must be examined under the rational basis test. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Golden v. State Board of Law Examiners
green
1 sentence1984Md. 1978), vacated as moot, 614 F.2d 943 (4th Cir. 1980). 11 Various arguments in support of a residency requirement for admission to the bar on examination have been rejected as not meeting the two-pronged test set forth in the Hicklin case. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Hicklin v. Orbeck
green
1 sentence1984Hicklin v. Orbeck, supra at 526 . | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Standing v. Department of Labor & Industries
green
1 sentence1984As discrimination between state citizens and out-of-state residents would not create a “suspect classification” mandating strict scrutiny, Standing v. Dept. of Labor & Indus., 598 P.2d 725 (Wash. 1979), a residency requirement would also pass constitutional muster under the equal protection clause if it were rationally related to a legitimate legislative purpose or objective. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Lopez v. Wyman
green
1 sentence1971This report (p. 79) takes “note of the residency requirement adopted by the State of New York, since . . . [its] effect . . . will be felt by the Commonwealth at least until the courts decide on its constitutionality.” It appears that following the proceedings in Lopes v. Wyman reported in 329 F. Supp. 483 (W. | 1 | 1971–1971 |
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.