Legal Opinion · Dissent

Macquarrie v. Balch

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided January 17, 1972No. 273318Published

1DissentLewiton, J.

Despite the small amount involved in this case, I feel that the question of the proper construction of G.L. c. 118, § 10 is of sufficient importance to warrant expressing my views thereon. I am prompted to do so by reason of the fact that several other statutory programs for the relief of needy persons contain language substantially identical with that of § 10 (see, e.g., G.L. c. 115, § 5; G.L. c. 118A, § 6; G.L. c. 118D, § 13), and because I believe that the construction adopted by the majority here would destroy the protection with which the Legislature sought to shield public funds…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Porter v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Trotter v. TennesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  3. Lawrence v. ShawSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  4. Bolster v. Commissioner of Corporations & TaxationMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  5. Commonwealth v. S. S. Kresge Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929

19 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