Miles Johnston d/b/a Johnston Drywall v Jan Five Corp. d/b/a Alexandra Construction, National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburg and Hartford Fire Insurance Company Middlesex Superior Court C.A. MICV2002-04098 Successfully prosecuted subcontractor’s claims pursuant to M.G.L. c. 149 § 29 to judgment, and successfully defended delay claims and improper work claims by general contractor. Subcontractor […]
Category: Civil Litigation
In an important decision for employers, the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination recently clarified the scope and purpose of its anti-retaliation statute, and awarded damages to an employee who was terminated for submitting an internal complaint of sexual harassment directed by one of her co-workers towards another co-worker.
A recent personal injury case demonstrates that commercial property owners simply cannot be too cautious when it comes to ensuring their status as an additional insured on certificates issued to their tenants and contractors.
Recently, our office won another significant jury trial in Worcester Superior Court that demonstrates our experience and expertise in local land use and construction disputes.
Significant legal precedent has developed in Massachusetts recently concerning liability for personal injuries resulting from defective or unsafe conditions found on commercial and residential properties.
The question of what deductions can be permissibly taken from employee earnings presents a legal minefield for many employers.
In Boston Scientific Corp. v. Lee, the United States District Court in Massachusetts provided several considerations that weigh against restricting an employee’s right to work for competitors solely because the terms of a confidentiality or “non-disclosure” agreement have been breached.
Employers of all sizes should understand the difference between direct and indirect claims for employment discrimination.
Companies in Massachusetts must take proactive steps to prevent the improper use of confidential business information by their employees and associates, or risk losing protection of that information under the law.
The recent Massachusetts case should deter developers and contractors from making misleading representations as to when and how outstanding invoices for additional services or materials will be paid