In the Matter of: Michael E. Schechterly

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the contract's choice of New York law would not govern the Massachusetts Wage Act claim because it makes no reference to statutory causes of actions
• holding that contract’s choice of New York law would not govern plaintiff’s Wage Act claim because it made no reference to statutory causes of action
• holding that the contract's choice of New York law would not govern the Massachusetts Wage Act claim because it makes no reference to statutory causes of actions
• stating that the Act “protect[s] fundamental public policy,” and that “the Legislature has highlighted the fundamental importance of the Wage Act”
• holding “the contract’s choice of New York law would 13 not govern the Wage Act claim” because the contract made “no reference to statutory causes of 14 action”
• finding that the Wage Act embodies a fundamental public policy of the Commonwealth

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).