[PDF] Top 20 Chapter 13: Civil Practice and Procedure

... Restrictions on oral argument have been imposed with accelerating frequency in recent years, particularly by federal courts of appeals. 6 The action of the Massachu[r] ... See full document

... The initial question with regard to this order was whether such an order allowing a motion for a new trial was interlocutory and, therefore, not ripe for review until [r] ... See full document

... After reaching this conclusion, the Supreme Judicial Court outlined the procedures that should be followed before interrogating prospective jurors as to possible racial prejudice, wh[r] ... See full document

... the commissioner of correction shall notify such prisoner in writing [of an untried indictment, information or complaint], stating its contents, including the court in whi[r] ... See full document

... If the trustee or an unsecured creditor objects to confirmation of the plan, the court must find that the unsecured claim will be paid in full or that the plan [r] ... See full document

... The local summary judgment rule closely tracks Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure which has had a long and successful history as an important tool of [r] ... See full document

... The superior court denied the motion and was affirmed by the Appeals CourtY' The Appeals Court noted that the judge below did not state his reasons for denying the [r] ... See full document

... At least one case involving a challenge to the validity of service of process under chapter 223A indirectly indicates that such service need not be made by an officer authorized by st[r] ... See full document

... " But see D'Annolfo v. This may not be an adequate safeguard for the constitutional right to trial by jury because the plaintiff, in deciding whether to accept or reject the judg[r] ... See full document

... Plaintiffs then filed a motion in the Supreme Judicial Court seeking to revoke the interlocutory superior court order appointing the district.. court judge master.[r] ... See full document

... The promulgation by the United States Supreme Court of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in 1938,4 conspicuously featuring liberalized discovery procedure, was hailed by t[r] ... See full document

... 223, §2, authorized ac- tions to be brought in a District Court in a judicial district where the defendant resides or has a usual place of business or a district ad[r] ... See full document

... The Court further pointed out that a group of taxpayers for purposes of declaratory relief did not qualify validly as plaintiffs in a class suit and thus the result i[r] ... See full document

... superior court on March 23, 1978 alleging that negligence on the part of an employee of the Commonwealth had caused him to fall and injure himself on September 20, 1977.13 The [r] ... See full document

... The Supreme Judicial Court decided that although in such a case the principal and agent might be joined as parties by virtue of the provisions of Chapter 231, [r] ... See full document

... the federal District Court for Massachusetts held that where a non- resident guaranteed a note made in Massachusetts by a Massachusetts obligor, the nonresident by virtue [r] ... See full document

... Thus, in grant- ing the motion of the Massachusetts packer for summary judgment, the court permitted the use of the doctrine of collateral estoppel defen- sively, although t[r] ... See full document

... and/or Sports Equipment for refund on defective balls (this will probably be an action for breach of implied warranties, unless actual warranties were given); (e)[r] ... See full document

... The district court further noted that, while some Massachusetts cases had allowed for substitution of parties after the expiration of the period of the statute of limitat[r] ... See full document

... WENDELL F. GRIMES is Professor of Law at Boston College Law School. He is a member of the Massachusetts and Federal Bars. The author wishes to acknowledge the assistanc[r] ... See full document