Legal Opinion

Crenshaw v. Macklin

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 21, 2000PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, C.J.

The plaintiff, Jacqueline Crenshaw, appeals from a decision of a judge in the District Court denying her request for a permanent protective order against the defendant, Wallace Macklin, pursuant to G. L. c. 209A, § 3. The judge said that she was not authorized to do so. We granted the plaintiff’s application for direct appellate review. We hold that G. L. c. 209A, § 3, empowers a judge in the District Court (or any other court with jurisdiction to consider the matter) to issue a permanent protective order at a renewal hearing. We remand the case to the District Court for further proceedings…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Long v. GeorgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  2. Industrial Finance Corp. v. State Tax CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  3. Harvard Law School Coalition for Civil Rights v. President & Fellows of Harvard CollegeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
  4. Peterson v. CadoganMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  5. O'Brien v. Director of the Division of Employment SecurityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984

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

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. Iamele v. AsselinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
  2. MacDonald v. CarusoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
  3. Vittone v. ClairmontMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2005
  4. Callahan v. CallahanMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2014
  5. E.C.O. v. ComptonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2013

34 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