Legal Opinion

Machado v. Leahy

Massachusetts Superior Court

Decided January 3, 2004No. BRCV200200514PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtKane, J.

Plaintiffs are eleven of approximately 2,500 attorneys who accept assignments from the Private Counsel Division of the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS) to represent persons constitutionally entitled to counsel at the Commonwealth’s expense in criminal prosecutions and certain civil matters. Plaintiffs filed this action claiming that the compensation rates set and paid by CPCS, subject to legislative appropriation, are inadequate, leaving plaintiffs unfairly underpaid, overburdened, and less able to provide constitutionally required representation. They brought this action against…

2Cases cited45 opinions

  1. City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. Webb's Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc. v. BeckwithSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Nader v. CitronMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Batterman v. LeahyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API