6 Massachusetts opinions name it 1 courts 1980–2006 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 |
|---|---|---|
Dinsky v. Town of Framinghamgreen2 sentences2006See Dinsky v. Framingham, 386 Mass. 801, 804 (1982) (“the abrogation of the doctrine of governmental immunity by the Act simply removed the defense of immunity in certain tort actions against the Commonwealth, municipalities and other governmental subdivisions”). 1985In Dinsky, supra at 804 , we recognized “the basic principle that the abrogation of the doctrine of governmental immunity by the Act [G. | 2 | 3 |
Tennessee v. Lanegreen1 sentence2004Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, 533-534 (2004) (Lane). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Malonegreen1 sentence1980See Graci v. Damon, 6 Mass. App. Ct. 160, 169-170 , aff’d, 376 Mass. 931 (1978) (abolition of assumption of the risk is a substantive change in the law). | 1 | 1 |
Graci v. Damongreen1 sentence1980See Graci v. Damon, 6 Mass. App. Ct. 160, 169-170 , aff’d, 376 Mass. 931 (1978) (abolition of assumption of the risk is a substantive change in the law). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
City of Boerne v. Flores
red
1 sentence2004Boeme v. Flores, supra. In Garrett, supra at 360 n.1, 374, the Court held that Congress had not validly abrogated the States’ immunity with respect to employment discrimination claims under Title I of the ADA, leaving open the question whether the abrogation of immunity would be valid as to claims of denial of access under Title II. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Board of Trustees of Univ. of Ala. v. Garrett
green
1 sentence2004Boeme v. Flores, supra. In Garrett, supra at 360 n.1, 374, the Court held that Congress had not validly abrogated the States’ immunity with respect to employment discrimination claims under Title I of the ADA, leaving open the question whether the abrogation of immunity would be valid as to claims of denial of access under Title II. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Commonwealth v. Bishop
green
1 sentence1996As this court observed in Bishop, supra at 177 , our (elusive) goal in cases of this general nature has been to articulate a standard that will, to the extent possible, result in the abrogation of a privilege only “in those cases in which there is a reasonable risk that nondisclosure may result in an erroneous conviction.” In the Bishop opinion, after experience with other approaches, we attempted to fashion a test and protocol that would strike the proper balance between the rights involved. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
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.