section or

Citation: section or
Parent Document: Larrabee v. Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (2019)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 2019-11-19
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4679938/larrabee-v-massachusetts-commis... ↗

Full Text

1,175 chars

7 The policy arguments propounded by the parties contain
factual disputes that would require fact finding regarding the
balancing of the public interest in disclosure, thus barring
summary judgment for the MCAD on this basis. See Boston Globe
Media Partners, LLC, 482 Mass. at 448. For example, the MCAD's
acting chief of enforcement and deputy general counsel submitted
an affidavit stating his opinion that complainants may be
discouraged from filing or pursuing claims unless the charges
remain confidential until the investigation closes, and that
respondents may also be subject to harassment or harm to
reputation. Larrabee served interrogatories requesting examples
or instances where this had occurred, but the MCAD was unable to
produce any. Similarly, the MCAD expressed concern regarding
retaliation against complainants or witnesses if the charge data
were produced. However, the complaint is served on the
respondent at the outset of the investigation, and witness
statements remain confidential until such time as the
investigation is completed and the case is certified to public
hearing.
                                                                    13

Other Sections in This Document (253)

Full Text