William Meade

The case involved a defendant convicted in 2007 of multiple counts of rape, kidnapping, and related offenses stemming from a violent attack on a former dating partner; he received a prison sentence followed by ten years of probation that included mandatory GPS monitoring under G.L. c. 265, § 47. After release, the defendant moved in 2023 to vacate the GPS condition, claiming it constituted an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment and art. 14. The motion judge denied the motion but allowed review after five years, and also denied reconsideration. The Appeals Court affirmed the imposition of GPS monitoring, finding it supported by an individualized balancing of the Commonwealth's interests in public safety and rehabilitation against the defendant's privacy interests, given factors such as the crime's severity, his criminal history, and sex-offender classification. However, the court reversed the order as to the ten-year duration, holding that the judge failed to make specific findings on the incremental liberty intrusion over time or to set a defined monitoring period, and remanded for further proceedings.

criminal lawcivil rightsprocedure

In Commonwealth v. Justin Page, the defendant faced firearm and drug charges after police seized a pistol, knife, cash, and heroin from his backpack during a response to a reported medical emergency in a supermarket parking lot. The defendant moved to suppress the evidence, arguing that the warrantless search violated constitutional protections, but the motion judge denied it under the community caretaking exception. After entering a conditional guilty plea that preserved his right to appeal the suppression ruling, the defendant challenged the denial on appeal. The Appeals Court affirmed, holding that the search was justified because officers acted to check for weapons for public safety and to identify the apparently overdosing defendant, with actions objectively divorced from criminal investigation. The court noted that the officers were off-duty initially responding to a person down in a car and followed department policy for medical emergencies.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned whether building permits issued in 2011 for a biomass power plant in Springfield had expired after accounting for extensions under the 2010 permit extension act and any litigation tolling periods. The zoning board revoked the permits following a 2020 enforcement request, and the Land Court granted summary judgment upholding the revocation on the ground that the four-year statutory extension ran concurrently with litigation tolling. The Appeals Court reversed, holding that the statutory phrase "in addition to the lawful term of the approval" required the four-year extension to begin only after the end of any litigation tolling period, so that the permits remained in effect. The court based this interpretation on the plain statutory language and the act's purpose of responding to the Great Recession by extending qualifying permits.

business & regulatorypropertyprocedure

In Commonwealth v. Michael C. Pardee, the defendant was convicted after a jury trial of eight counts of larceny over $1,200 and eight counts of uttering a false check for cashing eight handwritten checks totaling about $34,000 drawn on the account of a deceased woman with dementia, which were not authorized by her power of attorney. The defendant appealed, arguing insufficient evidence and erroneous admission of certain testimony regarding check cashing procedures and the firing of a caregiver. The Appeals Court affirmed the convictions, holding that the evidence, including identification from the check cashing facility and the circumstances of the checks, was sufficient to support the verdicts, and that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in admitting the challenged evidence as it was relevant and not unduly prejudicial.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a dispute between the estate of Helen Krumsiek and Collins Electric Company, Inc. (CEC) over the terms of a stock redemption agreement (SRA) requiring CEC to buy back shares upon a shareholder's death, specifically the amount of a "dividend payment in year of death" under the fifth amendment to the SRA. After a jury trial found that CEC breached the agreement by failing to make timely and correct payments totaling over $2 million, the trial judge ruled that the estate could terminate the SRA and retain its shares. On appeal, the Massachusetts Appeals Court vacated the breach of contract judgment and related rulings, remanding for a new trial. The court held that the trial judge abused his discretion by excluding evidence of how CEC handled two prior shareholder redemptions, as that course-of-performance evidence was relevant to determining the parties' intended meaning of the disputed contract clause.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved a dispute over the enforceability of an offer to purchase (OTP) for real estate in Charlestown between buyer Gregory McCarthy and sellers Jacob F. Young, III, and Katherine Anderson Young as trustees. The buyer sought specific performance and damages after the sellers terminated negotiations over an easement for maintenance on an abutting property, despite no purchase and sale agreement being executed. The Land Court had ordered the sellers to convey the property, but the Appeals Court reversed, holding that the OTP was not enforceable because it did not include all material terms and the parties' ongoing negotiations over the easement constituted only an unenforceable agreement to agree.

propertyprocedure

The case involved a teacher, Pauline Chaloff, who worked for Westwood Public Schools for four school years but took fifty-six days of protected parental leave during her second year under G.L. c. 149, §105D. Westwood determined that the leave interrupted her consecutive service, requiring an extra year before she could qualify for professional teacher status (PTS or tenure) under G.L. c. 71, §41, and later terminated her employment; an arbitrator and Superior Court judge agreed with the school. The Appeals Court reversed, concluding that the teacher had completed the requisite three consecutive school years and attained PTS. The court reasoned that the parental leave statute expressly protects an employee's seniority, length of service credit, and other employment rights, and that this protection must be accommodated within the tenure and evaluation framework without requiring an additional year of service.

labor & employment

In Prism Group, Inc. v. Slingshot Technologies Corporation, the plaintiff sought unpaid sales commissions from the defendant for recruiting two healthcare customers, with the dispute centering on the duration of the commission payments under their agreements. After a bench trial, the Superior Court judge found that the contracts lacked an express duration term and supplied a reasonable one, requiring Slingshot to pay commissions as long as the customers continued doing business with it, resulting in a $4.1 million judgment for breaches. On appeal, the Appeals Court affirmed, holding that contracts obligating payments for an indefinite period tied to a specific event, like ongoing customer relations, are enforceable and not automatically terminable at will, and found no error in the judge's determinations regarding duration or commission rates.

business & regulatory

The case involved John B. Barranco, who retired in 2005 as executive director of a public school collaborative and began receiving a pension from the Massachusetts Teachers' Retirement System (MTRS) while continuing to work in the same role for a related private nonprofit entity (MEC) that provided services to the collaborative. MTRS investigated and determined that portions of Barranco's post-retirement MEC earnings (initially 25%, later revised to 55%) were attributable to services rendered to the governmental collaborative, exceeding the postretirement earnings limits in G.L. c. 32, § 91, resulting in recoupment of excess payments totaling $815,746.77 through pension withholdings. After hearings and appeals, DALA and CRAB upheld MTRS's calculations and actions. On judicial review, the Appeals Court affirmed, holding that the statute applied because Barranco's work constituted service to a governmental unit, the earnings allocations were supported by the record, and he received adequate notice and process consistent with the retirement scheme.

labor & employmentprocedure

In this case, the defendant appealed his jury convictions for larceny over $250, assault by means of a dangerous weapon, reckless operation of a motor vehicle, and failure to stop for a police officer, which arose from an incident at a Home Depot store where he was seen throwing boxes over a fence, then nearly striking an officer with his truck while fleeing. The defendant argued that the absence of a special verdict slip on the two theories of assault created a substantial risk of miscarriage of justice, that evidence was insufficient to support the assault conviction, and that the judge erred in denying a request for a non-suggestive in-court identification procedure. The Appeals Court affirmed the convictions, holding that a special verdict slip was not required because the two theories of assault (attempted battery and threatened battery) are not mutually exclusive, that the evidence was sufficient under either theory, and that the remaining claims lacked merit or were waived. The court reasoned that general unanimity instructions sufficed and that the officer's identification was reliable based on his clear observations during the confrontation.

criminal law

In this case, the defendant was convicted of assault and battery after a jury-waived trial based on an incident in which he allegedly punched his fifteen-year-old son during a domestic argument. The trial judge permitted the Commonwealth to introduce the victim's mother's affidavit and testimony from a prior c. 209A abuse prevention order proceeding as substantive evidence, even though she recanted at trial and claimed the injury was accidental. The Appeals Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the Daye rule allowing sworn prior inconsistent statements to be used for their probative value extends to such affidavits due to their indicia of reliability, including the requirement that they be made under penalty of perjury. The court further found that the victim's medical records, which described the incident as an intentional strike, provided additional sufficient evidence to support the guilty finding under the Latimore standard.

criminal lawprocedure

In Commonwealth v. Farnsworth, the defendant was convicted after a jury-waived trial of possession of psilocybin, possession of marijuana with intent to distribute in a school zone, and related drug offenses, as well as improper storage of a shotgun. The Appeals Court affirmed the convictions, rejecting claims that evidence found during a fire response should have been suppressed, that hearsay was improperly admitted, that there was insufficient evidence of constructive possession, and that a new trial motion was wrongly denied. The court reasoned that the firefighter's initial entry was lawful under the emergency exception, the mother's consent to a subsequent police search was voluntary and authorized, the seized items were in plain view or within the consent's scope, and the evidence supported the convictions including constructive possession by the defendant.

criminal lawgunsprocedure