Legal Opinion

City of Cambridge v. Attorney General

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 16, 1991PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLynch, J.

At issue in this declaratory judgment action is whether six statutes enacted by the Legislature in 1987 and 1988, mandating the inclusion of certain benefits in all individual and group health insurance plans sold in Massachusetts, violated art. 115 of the Amendments to the Massachusetts Constitution.2 That article provides that “[n]o law imposing additional costs upon two or more cities or towns by the regulation of the compensation, hours, status, conditions or benefits of municipal employment shall be effective in any city or town” unless the city or town accepts the law, the Legislature…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Metropolitan Life Insurance v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Spence v. Boston Edison Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983
  3. Town of Arlington v. Board of Conciliation & ArbitrationMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
  4. Opinions of the Justices to the House of RepresentativesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1969
  5. Attorney General v. Travelers InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. National Ass'n of Government Employees v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1995
  2. Adams v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2012
  3. Boston Teachers Union, Local 66 AFT, AFL-CIO v. City of BostonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1998
  4. National Ass'n of Government Employees v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Superior Court · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API