Court Opinion

ID: 2964306
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:23:45.947877+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:21:06.751185
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 96-1056

                                  KATHERINE FURTADO,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                            COMMONWEALTH ELECTRIC, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.
                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                   [Hon. Reginald C. Lindsay, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                          Boudin and Lynch, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________
                                 ____________________

            Katherine Furtado on brief pro se.
            _________________
            David S. Rubin, N. Jay Shepherd, Kearns & Rubin, P.C. and  Michael
            ______________  _______________  ____________________      _______
        Hartnett  on  brief  for  appellees   Commonwealth  Electric  Company,
        ________
        Commonwealth  Energy System,  Douglas B.  Miller,  Russell D.  Wright,
        Kevin Roberts, and Gerald Bowden.
            Robert D. Manning, Bryan C. Decker  and Angoff, Goldman,  Manning,
            _________________  _______________      __________________________
        Pyle,  & Wanger  P.C. on  brief for  appellees Brotherhood  of Utility
        _____________________
        Workers  of  New  England,  Local  333,  Andrew  Woodacre  and  Philip
        Trombley.

                                 ____________________

                                   August 14, 1996
                                 ____________________

                      Per Curiam.   Upon de novo review we agree with the
                      __________         __ ____

            district court's decision to  dismiss the complaint  because,

            even  with plaintiff's  amendments,  it  fails to  articulate

            facts sufficient to sustain a cognizable claim.  The judgment

            is affirmed and  modified to reflect  that the state  claims,
               ________      ________

            and any  unexhausted  claims within  the  exclusive  original

            jurisdiction  of  an  administrative  agency,  are  dismissed

            without prejudice.

                      Affirmed as modified.
                      ________    ________