Legal Opinion

Carney v. City of Springfield

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided December 19, 1988PublishedCited by 68 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNolan, J.

The plaintiff, Michael P. Carney, appeals from a Superior Court judgment entered following allowance of a motion for summary judgment filed by the city of Springfield. The test whether a motion for summary judgment should be allowed is twofold: (1) whether after consideration of the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and affidavits, a genuine issue of material fact exists; and (2) whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Mass. R. Civ. P. 56 (c), 365 Mass. 824 (1974). The Superior Court judge, in this action in the nature of certiorari, as provided…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Kastigar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Garrity v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Lefkowitz v. TurleySupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. Uniformed Sanitation Men Ass'n v. Commissioner of Sanitation of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  5. Attorney General v. ColletonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982

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

3Cited by68 opinions

  1. FIC Homes of Blackstone, Inc. v. Conservation CommissionMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1996
  2. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority v. Auditor of the CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2000
  3. State Board of Retirement v. BulgerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006
  4. St. Botolph Citizens Committee, Inc. v. Boston Redevelopment AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1999
  5. Chardin v. Police CommissionerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2013

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

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

Powered by the Exa API