Legal Opinion

Machado v. Committee for Public Counsel Services

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided August 24, 1995No. 94-P-718PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKass, J.

Stripped to its essentials, the grievance of the plaintiffs is that the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS) has not paid them promptly for legal services performed in behalf of indigent persons accused of crime. A judge of the Superior Court allowed a defense motion for summary judgment, largely on the ground that the obligation to compensate private counsel, or any interest for late payment, was subject to legislative appropriation. We affirm.

Paul J. Machado and Joseph Rosa are lawyers who have accepted appointments as “private counsel” in criminal cases under G. L. c. 211D, §…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Lowell Bar Ass'n v. LoebMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  2. Opinion of the Justices to the SenateMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
  3. McMurdo v. GetterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  4. Cullen v. Building Inspector of North AttleboroughMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1968
  5. In re CohenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. MatrangaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2009
  2. Moore v. McManusMassachusetts Superior Court · 1998
  3. Boston Medical Center Corp. v. Secretary of Executive Office of Health & Human ServicesMassachusetts Superior Court · 2010
  4. Machado v. LeahyMassachusetts Superior Court · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API