Legal Opinion

Yeretsky v. City of Attleboro

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 28, 1997PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGreaney, J.

The plaintiffs are two retired employees of the defendant, the city of Attleboro (city). They are members of the city’s retirement system and not members of any collective bargaining unit. The plaintiffs brought a complaint in the Superior Court seeking declaratory and injunctive relief in connection with a claim that, under the third paragraph of *316G. L. c. 32B, § 16, which concerns the allocation of premium costs for health maintenance organization (HMO) coverage (see note 6, infra), the city was obligated to pay 90% of their HMO premium costs from July 1, 1990, and continuing. It was agreed…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Board of Education v. Assessor of WorcesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  2. Industrial Finance Corp. v. State Tax CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  3. National Ass'n of Government Employees v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1995
  4. Ludlow Education Ass'n v. Town of LudlowMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1991
  5. City of Everett v. Local 1656, International Ass'n of FirefightersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. New Bedford Housing Authority v. OlanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2001
  2. City of Somerville v. Commonwealth Employment Relations BoardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2015
  3. Galenski v. Town of ErvingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2015
  4. Twomey v. Town of MiddleboroughMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
  5. Cioch v. Treasurer of LudlowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2007

9 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