Commonwealth v. Mahdi

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that receiving independent advice from expert witness and trial counsel was sufficient even when specifics of actual investigation were unknown
• condemning closing argument [in that case by prosecutor] calculated to distract jurors from detached consideration of the evidence
• setting out factors to consider in evaluating whether Miranda violation is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt
• rejecting chapter 93A claims because, even if insurer “had conducted a proper investigation,” it would have been justified in refusing settlement, so “any omission” by the insurer “did not cause any injury to or adversely affect the plaintiffs”
• “[t]he only apparent purpose of such questioning was to inject racial hatred into the trial”
• Claimants held to be proper plaintiffs under Chapter 93A, § 9 even though they had no contractual relation whatsoever with the defendant insurer

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).