11 Massachusetts opinions name it 2 courts 1986–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Dickerson v. Attorney Generalgreen2 sentences2018See Dickerson v. Attorney Gen ., 396 Mass. 740 , 743, 488 N.E.2d 757 (1986) ("For the purpose of equal protection analysis, our standard of review under ... the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights is the same as under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution"). 2018See Dickerson v. Attorney Gen ., 396 Mass. 740 , 743, 488 N.E.2d 757 (1986) ("For the purpose of equal protection analysis, our standard of review under ... the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights is the same as under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution"). | 9 | 10 |
Opinion of the Justices to House of Representativesgreen1 sentence2004L. c. 121A, § 10. “[F]or the purpose of equal protection analysis, [the] standard of review under the cognate provisions of the Massachusetts [Constitution] is the same as under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution.” Opinion of the Justices, 408 Mass. 1215, 1223 (1990), quoting Dickerson v. Attorney Gen., 396 Mass. 740, 743 (1986). | 1 | 1 |
Tobin's Casegreen1 sentence1998A. Equal Protection “For the purpose of equal protection analysis, [the] standard of review under . . . the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights! 14 ] is the same as under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution.” Tobin's Case, 424 Mass. 250, 252 (1997), quoting Dickerson v. Attorney Gen., 396 Mass. 740, 743 (1986). 15 Where a statutory classification like that made by the Towns-Near-the-Border Exception “involv[es] neither fundamental rights nor suspect classes,” it “will be reviewed under a rational basis test.” Take Five Vending, Ltd. v. Provincetown, 415 Mass. 741, 748 (1993) ( | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Henry's Drywall Co., Inc.green1 sentence1998Marshfield Family Skateland, Inc. v. Marshfield, 389 Mass. 436, 445 (1983) [appeal dismissed, 464 U.S. 987 ] . . . "[U]nder the rational basis test, ‘the person making the challenge has an onerous burden of proof in establishing the invalidity of the statute.’ Commonwealth v. Henry’s Drywall Co., [ 366 Mass. 539, 541 (1974)]. . . ‘[I]f a statute or ordinance serves a legitimate purpose, and if the means the State adopted are rationally related to the achievement of that purpose, the legislation will withstand constitutional challenge’ (footnote omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Marshfield Family Skateland, Inc. v. Town of Marshfieldgreen1 sentence1998Marshfield Family Skateland, Inc. v. Marshfield, 389 Mass. 436, 445 (1983) [appeal dismissed, 464 U.S. 987 ] . . . "[U]nder the rational basis test, ‘the person making the challenge has an onerous burden of proof in establishing the invalidity of the statute.’ Commonwealth v. Henry’s Drywall Co., [ 366 Mass. 539, 541 (1974)]. . . ‘[I]f a statute or ordinance serves a legitimate purpose, and if the means the State adopted are rationally related to the achievement of that purpose, the legislation will withstand constitutional challenge’ (footnote omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Take Five Vending, Ltd. v. Town of Provincetowngreen1 sentence1998A. Equal Protection “For the purpose of equal protection analysis, [the] standard of review under . . . the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights! 14 ] is the same as under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution.” Tobin's Case, 424 Mass. 250, 252 (1997), quoting Dickerson v. Attorney Gen., 396 Mass. 740, 743 (1986). 15 Where a statutory classification like that made by the Towns-Near-the-Border Exception “involv[es] neither fundamental rights nor suspect classes,” it “will be reviewed under a rational basis test.” Take Five Vending, Ltd. v. Provincetown, 415 Mass. 741, 748 (1993) ( | 1 | 1 |
Rushworth v. Registrar of Motor Vehiclesgreen1 sentence1993“For the purpose of equal protection analysis, our standard of review under . . . the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights is the same as under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution.” Rushworth v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 413 Mass. 265, 272 (1992), quoting Dickerson v. Attorney Gen., 396 Mass. 740, 743 (1986). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Franklin Fruit Co.green1 sentence1986Commonwealth v. Franklin Fruit Co., 388 Mass. 228, 235 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lewis v. United States
green
1 sentence1998Marshfield Family Skateland, Inc. v. Marshfield, 389 Mass. 436, 445 (1983) [appeal dismissed, 464 U.S. 987 ] . . . "[U]nder the rational basis test, ‘the person making the challenge has an onerous burden of proof in establishing the invalidity of the statute.’ Commonwealth v. Henry’s Drywall Co., [ 366 Mass. 539, 541 (1974)]. . . ‘[I]f a statute or ordinance serves a legitimate purpose, and if the means the State adopted are rationally related to the achievement of that purpose, the legislation will withstand constitutional challenge’ (footnote omitted). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
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.