Holahan v. City of Medford

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that presentment to the Attorney General, acting as a public attorney, is proper only for an agency not within an executive office of the Commonwealth
• explaining that Vasys was “essentially an application of the principle that a litigant cannot assume inconsistent and contradictory positions”
• granting summary judgment for, and not applying estoppel against, assistant city solicitor where plaintiff was injured by printing press in public school and followed advice from assistant city solicitor instead of following statutory requirements for bringing a lawsuit
• declining to hold that presentment to the city solicitor is equivalent to presentment to the city manager, and stating that “[t]he city solicitor, though he or she may advise the city manager, does not possess the authority to settle a claim within the meaning of the statute”
• where the plaintiffs attorney spoke with the assistant solicitor who told him the claim was being investigated
• plaintiff presented his claim to the city solicitor rather than the city manager

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).