Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Mortimer

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided July 13, 2012PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtCordy, J.

Pursuant to SJ.C. Rule 3:10, § 1 (g), as amended, 416 Mass. 1306 (1993), a judge in the Superior Court found that the defendant, Thomas J. Mortimer, IV, was indigent but able to contribute $40,000 to his defense against indictments charging him with the murders of his wife, mother-in-law, and two children. In setting the amount of the defendant’s required contribution, the judge considered various assets that the defendant had reported to the probation department, including bank accounts, a college fund, and an individual retirement account (IRA). She also voiced “concerns as to the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Egelhoff v. Egelhoff Ex Rel. BreinerSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  2. Fuller v. OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Rousey v. JacowaySupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  4. Slocum v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
  5. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan (In Re Kaplan)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1993

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Commonwealth v. GalazkaMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API