Source: http://masslegalresources.com/tag/public
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 04:24:16+00:00

Document:
this court no later than April 30, 2018. Those lists may result in additional dismissals.
and any outstanding warrants associated with those convictions are recalled.
Department of the trial comi fmihwith in order to effectuate the dismissals.
MILLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS vs. M.P. & others.
Norfolk. October 2, 2017. – February 6, 2018.
Petition filed in the Norfolk County Division of the Juvenile Court Department on November 30, 2016.
judgment on the pleadings is ALLOWED.
of the Acts of 2012, known as “An Act for the Humanitarian Medical Use of Marijuana” (Act).
law’s effective date (January 1, 2013). G. L. c. 94C, App. § 1-9.
about its proposed dispensary, after which the Department evaluated and scored the application.
See id. at § 725.100(B)(3)-(5).
of 118, 127, and 118 on its three applications.
Code Mass. Regs. § 725.500(D). MIM invoked this procedure and filed this suit in August 2014.
additional materials it submitted at the March 2014 informal briefing.
new application process. Applications are now reviewed on a rolling basis as they are received.
applicants demonstrate compliance with the Act and the Department’s regulations.
receive a Provisional Certificate of Registration.
Registration and to pay an annual $ 50,000 registration fee if finally approved to operate a RMD.
“MIM has also moved on . . . [and] is now focused on different opportunities and locations.” Pl.
2 In its reply brief, MIM suggests a complicated remand procedure if the Court denies its request for monetary relief.
resolution of this lawsuit, remand of the matter now makes little sense and is waived by MIM.
deprived of a contract to recover bid preparation costs and lost profits. See, e.g., Paul Sardella Constr. Co. v.
judicial or quasi judicial tribunal which are not otherwise reviewable by a court.” ” Gifford v.
Commissioner of Pub. Health, 328 Mass. 608, 619 (1952); see also School Comm. of Hudson v.
plaintiff is seeking relief for the denial of an application submitted to an administrative agency.
but could only seek judicial review through an action in the nature of certiorari).
on its motion for judgment on the pleadings.
Gas Co. v. Newton, 425 Mass. 697 (1997) (city ordinance assessing a fee on public utilities unconstitutional tax).
NANCY CHADWICK vs. DUXBURY PUBLIC SCHOOLS & others.
Plymouth. May 3, 2016. – October 4, 2016.
Privileged Communication. Evidence, Privileged communication. Practice, Civil, Discovery. Public Employment, Collective bargaining. Labor, Collective bargaining.
Civil action commenced in the Superior Court Department on December 8, 2014.
KATELYNN GOODWIN vs. LEE PUBLIC SCHOOLS & others.
Berkshire. March 10, 2016. – August 23, 2016.
School and School Committee, Enforcement of discipline. Education, Disciplinary matter. Practice, Civil, Dismissal. Administrative Law, Exhaustion of remedies.
Civil action commenced in the Superior Court Department on December 30, 2014.
Suffolk. May 5, 2016. – August 17, 2016.
The petitioner, attorney Greg T. Schubert, filed papers in the county court entitled “writ of mandamus” and “writ of certiorari” that a single justice treated as a petition pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3, and denied. Schubert appeals, and we affirm.

References: § 1
 § 725
 § 725
 v.

 v.

 v.

 v. 
 § 3