Schenker v. Binns

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “where the essential nature of the plaintiffs claim is recovery for personal injuries . . . founded on negligence, his action, whether it be denominated tort or contract, is governed by c. 258”
• observing that structure of G.L.c. 258 imposes liability on public employer for public employee’s negligent act performed within scope of his employment but relieves public employees from liability
• where plaintiff's negligence counts were barred by failure to comply with the presentment requirement of G.L.c. 258, § 4, contract counts alleging same negligent acts were properly dismissed
• where plaintiff’s negligence counts were barred by failure to comply with the presentment requirement of G. L. c. 258, § 4, contract counts alleging same negligent acts were properly dismissed
• MTCA “imposes liability on a public employer for a public employee’s negligent act performed within the scope of his employment and relieves the public employee from liability”
• “policy against allowing form to prevail over substance is particularly strong in construing the Act in view of the explicit provision in §2 making its remedies exclusive”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).