10 Massachusetts opinions name it 3 courts 1949–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ackarey v. Carbonarogreen2 sentences1967In Ackarey v. Carbonaro, 320 Mass. 537, 539-540 , a tenant recovered in tort for consequential damages resulting from injuries to the tenant’s child. 1949The principle of Ingalls v. Hobbs , although extended to include in the implied agreement the structural condition of the house, Ackarey v. Carbonaro, 320 Mass. 537 , has been recognized as a departure from the general rule, Hacker v. Nitschke, 310 Mass. 754 , and in its application has been limited to factual conditions similar to those on which the decision was based. | 1 | 3 |
Bridgeman v. District Attorney for the Suffolk Districtgreen1 sentence2018See id . at 316, 67 N.E.3d 673 . | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Medinagreen1 sentence2002See Commonwealth v. Medina, 20 Mass. App. Ct. 258, 261 (1985). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Gildaygreen1 sentence1986Commonwealth v. Gilday, 382 Mass. 166, 174 (1980). *598 We have recognized, however, that, in some circumstances, the prosecutor should be required to seek access to material and exculpatory evidence. | 1 | 1 |
Draper v. Town Clerk of Greenfieldgreen1 sentence1982As there are no distinctive circumstances in this case which call for a departure from the general rule, cf. Draper v. Town Clerk of Greenfield, 384 Mass. 444, 455 (1981), we reverse the judgment and remand the case to the Superior Court for an assessment of attorney’s fees, including the fees relating to this appeal. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hacker v. Nitschke
green
2 sentences1966The opinion states with reference to Ingalls v. Hobbs that “Knowlton, J., care fully defined the limits of the exception which it made to the doctrine of caveat emptor which is ordinarily applicable to a lessee of real estate.” It cited with approval Hacker v. Nitschke, 310 Mass. 754 , 156 in which it was held that Ingalls v. Hobbs “is a departure from the general rule and should be confined within narrow limits.” The opinion concluded that “The house was fit for habitation when the plaintiff took possession. 1965This principle has been recognized as a departure from the general rule, Hacker v. Nitschke, 310 Mass. 754 , and in its application has been limited to factual conditions similar to those on which the decision was based. | 4 | 1949–1966 |
Schrottman v. Barnicle
green
1 sentence1989However, “it is sometimes necessary to depart from the general rule of retroactivity, in order to protect the reasonable expectations of parties.” Schrottman, supra. This case, however, does not warrant a departure from the general rule. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Gade v. National Creamery Co.
green
1 sentence1965Gade v. National Creamery Co., 324 Mass. 515 ; Legere v. Asselta, 342 Mass. 178 . | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Legere v. Asselta
green
1 sentence1965Gade v. National Creamery Co., 324 Mass. 515 ; Legere v. Asselta, 342 Mass. 178 . | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Bolieau v. Traiser
green
1 sentence1949Bolieau v. Traiser, 253 Mass. 346, 349 . | 1 | 1949–1949 |
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.