Legal Opinion

Sanitoy, Inc. v. Ilco Unican Corp.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 5, 1992PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNolan, J.

At issue is the fee shifting provision of § 15 of the Massachusetts Oil and Hazardous Material Release Prevention Act, G. L. c. 21E (1990 ed.) (Act). We consider whether § 15, entitled “Citizen Enforcement,” authorizes a trial judge to award attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees in a private party suit for reimbursement brought pursuant to § 4 of the Act. We affirm this portion of the judgment and hold that it does authorize such fees. We also consider whether the judge erred in awarding only a percentage of otherwise reasonable attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees to a party entitled to…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Linthicum v. ArchambaultMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
  2. General Electric Company v. Litton Industrial Automation Systems, Inc. And Litton Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990
  3. Dedham Water Company and Dedham-Westwood Water District v. Cumberland Farms Dairy, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
  4. Sheehy v. Lipton Industries, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1987
  5. Commissioner of Corporations & Taxation v. ClubMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Bank v. Thermo Elemental Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
  2. Oliveira v. PereiraMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
  3. Martignetti v. Haigh-Farr, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
  4. Griffith v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1993
  5. Thomas & Betts Corporation v. Alfa Laval, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2019

16 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