Kaplan v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

3 Citing cases

  1. Tyler v. Michaels Stores, Inc.

    840 F. Supp. 2d 438 (D. Mass. 2012)   Cited 18 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Stating that “dismissal of the underlying claims requires dismissal of the claim for declaratory relief as well”

    Title, headings and captions are accorded limited weight in statutory construction. Kaplan v. Contributory Ret. Appeal Bd., 51 Mass.App.Ct. 201, 205, 744 N.E.2d 1112 (2001) (holding that headings cannot control the plain provisions of the statute, “although they may shed light on ambiguous language” (citing American Family Life Assurance Co. v. Commissioner of Ins., 388 Mass. 468, 474, 446 N.E.2d 1061 (1983))); see also Bay Colony Mktg. Co. v. Fruit Salad, Inc., 41 Mass.App.Ct. 662, 666 n. 5, 672 N.E.2d 987 (1996). There is no indication in Section 105(a)'s caption alone that the Massachusetts legislature intended to create a statutory privacy interest so broad as to shield a consumer from receiving unwanted marketing materials.

  2. Nextel Communications of the Mid-Atlantic v. Town of Hanson

    No. CIV.A. 00-11417-DPW (D. Mass. Mar. 26, 2004)   Cited 9 times
    Objecting to the construction of a radio tower

    ; Kaplan v. Contributory Ret. Appeal Bd., 51 Mass. App. Ct. 201, 204-05 n. 6 (2001) ("[M]uch as the title of an act cannot limit its operation to a field more narrow than that established by the act itself, the various headings cited cannot control the specifics of the statutory provisions, although they may shed light on ambiguous language."). These arguments are superficially appealing, but defendants have two powerful and pointed arrows in their quiver.

  3. RICHARDS v. E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS, No

    BOARD No. 05183-99 (Mass. DIA Mar. 5, 2002)   Cited 1 times

    The basis for the self insurer's argument is its claim that § 65 (2)'s provisions governing opt outs are ambiguous and, as a result, need to be interpreted in the light of various legal and policy considerations. See Kaplan v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 51 Mass. App. Ct. 201, 205 (2001). We do not agree. "[S]tatutory language should be given effect consistent with its plain meaning and in light of the aim of the Legislature unless to do so would achieve an illogical result."