11 Massachusetts opinions name it 3 courts 1953–2013 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 |
|---|---|---|
Crocker v. Townsend Oil Co.green1 sentence2013In Crocker v. Townsend Oil Co., 464 Mass. 1, 6-7 (2012), we held that an employee whose claim for unpaid overtime pursuant to G. | 1 | 1 |
Dana Blackie v. State of Mainegreen1 sentence2008See, e.g., Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 76-77 (1984) (regular expectation that an associate attorney will be considered for partner can be constmed as a condition or privilege of employment under Title VII); Blackie, 75 F.3d at 726 (“under certain circumstances an employer’s inaction can operate to deprive an employee of a privilege of employment that an employee had reason to anticipate he would receive; in those situations, the deprivation constitutes an adverse employment action”); Randlett, 118 F.3d at 862 (consistently awarding permanent transfers due to hardship “a common enou | 1 | 1 |
Brown v. Nutter, McClennen & Fishgreen1 sentence2008Brown v. Nutter, McClennen & Fish, 45 Mass.App.Ct. 212, 216 (1998), and cases cited. | 1 | 1 |
cluster 743580green1 sentence2008See, e.g., Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 76-77 (1984) (regular expectation that an associate attorney will be considered for partner can be constmed as a condition or privilege of employment under Title VII); Blackie, 75 F.3d at 726 (“under certain circumstances an employer’s inaction can operate to deprive an employee of a privilege of employment that an employee had reason to anticipate he would receive; in those situations, the deprivation constitutes an adverse employment action”); Randlett, 118 F.3d at 862 (consistently awarding permanent transfers due to hardship “a common enou | 1 | 1 |
Hishon v. King & Spaldinggreen2 sentences2008See, e.g., Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 76-77 (1984) (regular expectation that an associate attorney will be considered for partner can be constmed as a condition or privilege of employment under Title VII); Blackie, 75 F.3d at 726 (“under certain circumstances an employer’s inaction can operate to deprive an employee of a privilege of employment that an employee had reason to anticipate he would receive; in those situations, the deprivation constitutes an adverse employment action”); Randlett, 118 F.3d at 862 (consistently awarding permanent transfers due to hardship “a common enou 2008“A benefit that is part and parcel of the employment relationship may not be doled out in a discrim inatory fashion, even if the employer would be free under the employment contract simply not to provide the benefit at all.” Hishon, supra at 75 . | 1 | 1 |
Informix, Inc. v. Rennellgreen1 sentence2007L. c. 9 3A regardless of whether that violation occurred during or after the employment relationship. 41 Mass.App.Ct. 161, 162-63 (1996). | 1 | 1 |
Roberts v. Dudleygreen2 sentences2004Similarly, in Roberts v. Dudley, 993 P.2d 901, 906 (Wash. 2000), the court recognized a common-law cause of action in tort for wrongful discharge of an employee in violation of public policy based upon a statute which declared that “no person shall be . . . excluded from any premises or place or work or employment on account of sex”; that statute provided no remedy and contained no exemption for small employers. 2004The court in Roberts also relied upon a state anti-discrimination act that declared it to be a civil right “to hold employment without discrimination.” Id. at 907 . | 1 | 1 |
McDermott's Casegreen1 sentence1998The essence of the distinction is the right to control.” (Emphasis supplied.) Brigham’s Case, 348 Mass. 140, 141-42 (1964), citing McDermott’s Case, 283 Mass. 74, 75-77 (1933) (“If the person doing the work is responsible only for the performance of what he agrees to do, in the way in which he agrees to do it, and is not subject to direction and control as to every detail of the work, he is an independent contractor”). 3 It is clear that Clark was not an employee under this test because Clark was not “at all times bound to obedience and subject to direction and supervision as to details" in hi | 1 | 1 |
Brigham's Casegreen1 sentence1998The essence of the distinction is the right to control.” (Emphasis supplied.) Brigham’s Case, 348 Mass. 140, 141-42 (1964), citing McDermott’s Case, 283 Mass. 74, 75-77 (1933) (“If the person doing the work is responsible only for the performance of what he agrees to do, in the way in which he agrees to do it, and is not subject to direction and control as to every detail of the work, he is an independent contractor”). 3 It is clear that Clark was not an employee under this test because Clark was not “at all times bound to obedience and subject to direction and supervision as to details" in hi | 1 | 1 |
Rudman v. Cowles Communications, Inc.green1 sentence1977“If an employee, a fortiori an executive employee, is engaged to fill a particular position, any material change in his duties, or significant reduction in rank, may constitute a breach of his employment agreement____As a necessary corollary, acts done by the employee in defense of his contract rights, or in assertion of an agreed status or function in the enterprise, are not insubordination.” Rudman v. Cowles Communications, Inc. 30 N.Y. 2d 1, 10 (1972). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Mogilevsky v. Bally Total Fitness Corp.
green
1 sentence2012We agree with the reasoning in Mogilevsky v. Bally Total Fitness Corp., supra, that an employee whose claim for unpaid overtime is barred by the two-year statute of limitations may nevertheless assert a claim for unpaid wages under the Wage Act. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Appley v. Locke
green
1 sentence2000Four Remaining Counts of the Complaint As to Counts One and Two (Interference with Contractual Relations and Interference with Advantageous Business Relations) the controlling case is Appley v. Locke, 396 Mass. 540 (1986) (holding that so long as the individual terminating the employment of an employee was authorized to do so, the employee has no claim against that individual for which relief could be granted). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Chartrand v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles
green
1 sentence1987L. c. 32, § 1, as “any person appointed by the governor to a position in the service of the commonwealth.” We have interpreted the scope of § 16 (5) in Welch v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 343 Mass. 502 (1962), and Chartrand v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 347 Mass. 470 (1964). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Welch v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board
green
1 sentence1987L. c. 32, § 1, as “any person appointed by the governor to a position in the service of the commonwealth.” We have interpreted the scope of § 16 (5) in Welch v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 343 Mass. 502 (1962), and Chartrand v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 347 Mass. 470 (1964). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Cripps's Case
green
1 sentence1953The only case of the three to which we need refer is Cripps’s Case, 216 Mass. 586 , which held that a release solely *576 by the employee did not bar the widow’s claim arising after his death. | 1 | 1953–1953 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.