§ 3

Citation: § 3
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

1,459 chars

10Larrabee did not contest the denial of his claim for
attorney's fees under count 3 on appeal, and any challenge to
the judge's ruling on that matter is therefore waived. See
Mass. R. A. P. 16 (a) (9), as appearing in 481 Mass. 1629
(2019). In view of our disposition, we need not reach
Larrabee's alternative claims presented in count 4 of the first
amended complaint, that the records requested are quasi-judicial
records that must be produced as a matter of common law, the
First Amendment, and G. L. c. 6, § 172 (m). Larrabee also
contends that the current policy violates the public records
act. Because our decision obviates the existence of a
controversy, we decline to reach these questions. See Gay &
Lesbian Advocates & Defenders v. Attorney Gen., 436 Mass. 132,
135 (2002) (disapproving of advisory opinions).
     11At oral argument the parties agreed that the operative
dispute in the case was the legal question concerning the MCAD's
nondisclosure of charge data while investigations were pending,
and that the form in which data was produced was not at issue on
appeal. See 950 Code Mass. Regs. § 32.07(1)(c), (d) (2017)
(provision of records in electronic form). See also G. L.
c. 66, § 6A (d); 950 Code Mass. Regs. § 32.07(1)(f) (2017)
(provision of records in segregable form is not creation of new
record). Any issues regarding the form of the data produced
                                                                  20 So ordered.

Other Sections in This Document (253)

Full Text