Massachusetts judicial news

From Judgepedia

News about or affecting the judiciary in Massachusetts.

Massachusetts court overturns child predator conviction

Boston, Massachusetts: The Massachusetts Supreme Court overturned, on Friday, February 5, the convictions of a man accused of sending explicit messages through an online chat to a minor. The Supreme Court threw out the convictions saying that the law bans the sending of "any matter harmful to minors" including "handwritten or printed material," and since online chats are technically neither, the man is not guilty of any crime. States across the country are now reviewing sexual predator laws in order to close this apparent loophole.^{[1] [2]}

Reporters not covered by petition protection laws

Massachusetts: The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled on February 1, that reporters are not protected by a law that protects citizen who petition the government against lawsuits. Fredda Hollander, the reporter in question, was not protected because she was acting as a paid journalist and not a citizen activist and, therefore, was supposed to be nuetral and objective. The ruling was prompted by Hollander's request to dismiss a defamation lawsuit filed by Steven Fustolo a developer in Boston's North End.^[1]

Massachusetts Supreme Court hands developer victory over town

Boston, Massachusetts: The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled in favor of the developer of a Westwood Station project on Tuesday, January 19. The court ruled that the town of Conton had missed its dealing to appeal the project approval.^[1]

Massachusetts invalidates contracts requiring arbitration

Massachusetts: The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled in Feeney v. Dell that contracts barring consumers from filing class-action lawsuits, and instead requiring individual arbitration of cases, are invalid.

"Massachusetts follows at least six other state supreme courts that have issued similar decisions between 2005 and 2008, including California, Illinois, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina and Washington. The U.S. courts of appeals for the 1st, 2d, 3d and 9th circuits have also weighed in with similar rulings from 2006 to 2009." ^[1]

The Supreme Judicial Court ruling does not prevent businesses from requiring their customers file individual claims in arbitration instead of in court. But if a business does require arbitration, it must permit customers to seek a class-action case before arbitration. ^[2]

References