18 Cited authorities

Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp.
486 U.S. 800 (1988) Cited 3,128 times 21 Legal Analyses
Holding that the appeal belonged before the regional circuit because the claims did not arise under patent law
Oto v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
224 F.3d 601 (7th Cir. 2000) Cited 1,289 times
Holding that a manifest error "is not demonstrated by the disappointment of the losing party. It is the wholesale disregard, misapplication, or failure to recognize controlling precedent."
Palmer v. Champion Mortg
465 F.3d 24 (1st Cir. 2006) Cited 551 times
Holding that three-business-day language rendered notice "crystal clear" where plaintiff received notice after the expiration date noted within notice had passed
Moro v. Shell Oil Co.
91 F.3d 872 (7th Cir. 1996) Cited 642 times
Holding that Rule 59(e) "enables the court to correct its own errors and thus avoid unnecessary appellate procedures"
U.S. v. Allen
573 F.3d 42 (1st Cir. 2009) Cited 231 times
Affirming district court's denial of reconsideration when appellant attempted to present new evidence in motion but didn't explain why evidence was previously omitted
Aybar v. Crispin-Reyes
118 F.3d 10 (1st Cir. 1997) Cited 307 times
Holding that the second of two successive motions for reconsideration did not toll the time for appeal
Romano v. U-Haul Intern
233 F.3d 655 (1st Cir. 2000) Cited 168 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the defendant employer is responsible for proving that it made good faith efforts to comply with the requirements of Title VII, and that the mere existence of an antidiscrimination policy was insufficient absent proof that the employer actually implemented the policy
Somers v. Converged Access, Inc.
454 Mass. 582 (Mass. 2009) Cited 120 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that employer was liable under the Wage Act even when it in good faith classified employee as an independent contractor instead of an employee
Difiore v. American Airlines, Inc.
454 Mass. 486 (Mass. 2009) Cited 91 times
Applying the Tip Statute, M.G.L. c. 149 § 152A
Awuah v. Coverall North America, Inc.
460 Mass. 484 (Mass. 2011) Cited 61 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding assented-to deduction for costs of workers' compensation insurance to be invalid and recoverable as damages
Section 149:148B - Persons performing service not authorized under this chapter deemed employees; exception
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149 § 148B Cited 174 times 33 Legal Analyses
Specifying types of services considered to be not those performed by an employee and noting that an employer's failure to make withholdings or payments that would be required for an employee "shall not be considered in making a determination" as to a person's employee status
Section 149:152A - Payment to, or retention by, employer of tips to employees; contract for payment
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149 § 152A Cited 75 times 7 Legal Analyses
Defining a "[t]ip" as "a sum of money, including any amount designated by a credit card patron, a gift or a gratuity, given as an acknowledgment of any service performed by a wait staff employee, service employee, or service bartender"

De Giovanni v. Jani-King International, Inc. et al

18 Cited authorities

Holding that the appeal belonged before the regional circuit because the claims did not arise under patent law

Holding that a manifest error "is not demonstrated by the disappointment of the losing party. It is the wholesale disregard, misapplication, or failure to recognize controlling precedent."

Holding that three-business-day language rendered notice "crystal clear" where plaintiff received notice after the expiration date noted within notice had passed

Holding that Rule 59(e) "enables the court to correct its own errors and thus avoid unnecessary appellate procedures"

Affirming district court's denial of reconsideration when appellant attempted to present new evidence in motion but didn't explain why evidence was previously omitted

Holding that the second of two successive motions for reconsideration did not toll the time for appeal

Holding that the defendant employer is responsible for proving that it made good faith efforts to comply with the requirements of Title VII, and that the mere existence of an antidiscrimination policy was insufficient absent proof that the employer actually implemented the policy

Holding that employer was liable under the Wage Act even when it in good faith classified employee as an independent contractor instead of an employee

Applying the Tip Statute, M.G.L. c. 149 § 152A

Holding assented-to deduction for costs of workers' compensation insurance to be invalid and recoverable as damages

Specifying types of services considered to be not those performed by an employee and noting that an employer's failure to make withholdings or payments that would be required for an employee "shall not be considered in making a determination" as to a person's employee status

Defining a "[t]ip" as "a sum of money, including any amount designated by a credit card patron, a gift or a gratuity, given as an acknowledgment of any service performed by a wait staff employee, service employee, or service bartender"