In re: Riley v. Decoulos

Filing 920100309

Opinion

var gAgent = navigator.userAgent.toLowerCase()
var gWindows = ( (gAgent.indexOf( "win" ) != -1 ) || ( gAgent.indexOf( "16bit" ) != -1 ) )
var gIE = ( gAgent.indexOf( "msie" ) != -1 )
var bInlineFloats = ( gWindows && gIE && ( parseInt( navigator.appVersion ) >= 4 ) )
var floatwnd = 0

var WPFootnote1 = 'Riley also brought a claim for unfair trade practices, \
claims against Decoulos in his capacity as attorney to the estate,\
claims against his law firm and claims against other defendants,\
but none of these are at issue on this appeal.\
'

var WPFootnote2 = '"Statute of limitations does not run in favor of receiver.\
The position of a receiver is one in which liability to account\
would not easily be barred, and so long as he is living he must be\
held to have been a trustee of the money received[,] therefore the\
defense of the statute of limitations is not a bar to a claim\
against him." Clark, Law of Receivers, § 418, at 705-06 (3d ed.\
1959).\
'

var WPFootnote3 = 'This was one of two alternative grounds adopted in San Juan\
Hotel (the other being tolling of the statute until the wrong was\
revealed). San Juan Hotel is not binding precedent as to\
Massachusetts law but rather is relevant and useful authority.\
'

var WPFootnote4 = 'Occasionally, a federal connection may convert state law\
claims into ones governed by federal law, Metropolitan Life Ins.\
Co. v. Taylor, 481 U.S. 58, 62-67 (1987); Textile Workers Union of\
Am. v. Lincoln Mills of Ala., 353 U.S. 448, 456-57 (1957), but the\
concerns in those cases are different. \
'

var WPFootnote5 = '"[A] trustee acting with the explicit approval of a\
bankruptcy court is entitled to absolute immunity" from personal\
liability as long as trustee has made "full and frank disclosure to\
creditors and the court" and did not "prevaricate[] or otherwise\
act[] in bad faith." In re Mailman Steam Carpet Cleaning Corp.,\
196 F.3d at 8; accord, Kermit Const. Corp. v. Banco Credito y\
Ahorro Ponceno, 547 F.2d 1, 3 (1st Cir. 1976)).\
'

var WPFootnote6 = 'The Restatement requires for issue preclusion a showing that\
the issue was actually litigated and decided on the merits. \
Restatement (Second) of Judgments §§ 27-28 (1982). Massachusetts\
law is similar. Alba v. Raytheon Co., 809 N.E.2d 516, 522 (Mass.\
2004) (where not "strictly essential" to the judgment, proponent\
must show adjudication to be "the product of full litigation and\
careful decision" (quoting Green v. Brookline, 757 N.E.2d 731, 735-36 (Mass. App. Ct. 2001))). The resolution must also be final, a\
requirement that Iannochino found satisfied because--unlike\
Decoulos\' awards--the disposition ended the attorney\'s service. \
Iannochino, 242 F.3d at 45. \
'

function WPShow( WPid, WPtext )
{
if( bInlineFloats )
eval( "document.all." + WPid + ".style.visibility = 'visible'" );
else
{
if( floatwnd == 0 || floatwnd.closed )
floatwnd = window.open( "", "comment", "toolbars=0,width=600,height=200,resizable=1,scrollbars=1,dependent=1" );
floatwnd.document.open( "text/html", "replace" );
floatwnd.document.write( "\r\n" );
floatwnd.document.write( " p { margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:1px; } \r\n" );
floatwnd.document.write( "\r\n" );
floatwnd.document.write( WPtext );
floatwnd.document.write( 'Close');
floatwnd.document.write( "