Trial of John R. Buzzell : before the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts for arson and burglary in the Ursuline Convent at Charlestown.

Mode of access: Internet.

Review of a report to the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, on the case of William Vans. With observations upon the dispensing power of the Legislature, and upon a decision of the Supreme Judicial Court, "nullifying" the said power.

"Postscript by William Vans": p. [13]-15 at end.

The town officer's guide, containing a compilation of the general laws of Massachusetts, relating to the whole power and duty of towns, districts, and parishes, with their several officers; with a digest of the decisions in the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, relating to the several subjects.

Mode of access: Internet.

Trial of the case of the Commonwealth versus David Lee Child, for publishing in the Massachusetts Journal a libel on the Honorable John Keyes : before the Supreme Judicial Court, holden at Cambridge, in the County of Middlesex /

"October term, 1828."

Case of the slave-child, Med : report of the arguments of counsel, and of the opinion of the court, in the case of Commonwealth vs. Aves; tried and determined in the Supreme judicial court of Massachusetts.

Med's case.--Arguments of counsel; Benjamin R. Curtis. esq., for the respondent, Ellis Gray Loring, esq., for the petitioner, Hon. Rufus Choate, for the petitioner, Charles P. Curtis, esq., for the respondent.--Opinion of the court.

Defence of the third article of the Massachusetts Declaration of rights / as delivered by Chief Justice Parsons, as the opinion of the Supreme Judicial Court, in the case of Barnes vs. Falmouth ...

Sabin

Trial of David Lynn, Jabez Meigs, Elijah Barton, Prince Cain, Nathaniel Lynn, Ansel Meigs, and Adam Pitts, for the murder of Paul Chadwick, at Malta, in Maine, on September 8th, 1809; before the Hon. Theodore Sedgwick ... Hon. Samuel Sewall ... Hon. George Thatcher, Hon. Isaac Parker, justices of the Supreme judicial court, held at Augusta, by adjournment, Nov. 16, 1809.

Mode of access: Internet.

Memoir of Theophilus Parsons, chief justice of the Supreme judicial court of Massachusetts; with notices of some of his contemporaries.

Mode of access: Internet.

Notes of cases decided in the Superior and Supreme Judicial Courts of Massachusetts from 1772 to 1789: taken by the Hon. William Cushing, one of the judges during that period and most of the time Chief Justice

Notes of cases taken by Judge William Cushing during his tenure on the Massachusetts superior and supreme courts. (Formerly MS 2141.)

Reports of cases in the Superior Court of Judicature of New Hampshire.

Vols. for 1874/75 reported by J.M. Shirley; 1875-76 by D. Hall.

The Scottish jurist : being reports of cases decided in the supreme courts of Scotland, and in the House of Lords on appeal from Scotland /

Mode of access: Internet.

Workmen's compensation law of the state of Pennsylvania, amendments and supplementary laws ... The rules of procedure of the board, compensation districts, forms and decisions of the courts of Pennsylvania (Supreme, Superior and Common pleas) for the year 1921, together with a digest of the decisions of the courts of 1916-1917-1918-1919-1920. Rehabilitation act of 1919.

Lettered on cover: Pennsylvania. Workmen's compensation law with rules of procedure. Supreme, Superior and Common pleas court decisions. IV. Mackey. 1921.

The 2008 declaration of independence by the Hong Kong Court and anomalies in the Hong Kong Company Law

Discusses two aspects of Hong Kong law: 1) the judgment of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal in A Solicitor v The Law Society of Hong Kong on whether Hong Kong courts were bound, post-1997, by pre-1997 House of Lords or Privy Council decisions, by pre-1997 decisions of their own, or by post-1997 overseas decisions from any jurisdiction; and 2) the need for clarification in the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance of whether a company can have a single legal representative, the ultra vires rule and the duties of company directors

The conceptualisation, sensitivity and measurement of holding costs and other selected elements impacting housing affordability (Literature review and research methodology for confirmation of PhD candidature)

It is widely held that strong relationships exist between housing, economic status, and well being. This is exemplified by widespread housing stock surpluses in many countries which threaten to destabilise numerous aspects related to individuals and community. However, the position of housing demand and supply is not consistent. The Australian position provides a distinct contrast whereby seemingly inexorable housing demand generally remains a critical issue affecting the socio-economic landscape. Underpinned by high levels of immigration, and further buoyed by sustained historically low interest rates, increasing income levels, and increased government assistance for first home buyers, this strong housing demand ensures elements related to housing affordability continue to gain prominence. A significant, but less visible factor impacting housing affordability – particularly new housing development – relates to holding costs. These costs are in many ways “hidden” and cannot always be easily identified. Although it is only one contributor, the nature and extent of its impact requires elucidation. In its simplest form, it commences with a calculation of the interest or opportunity cost of land holding. However, there is significantly more complexity for major new developments - particularly greenfield property development. Preliminary analysis conducted by the author suggests that even small shifts in primary factors impacting holding costs can appreciably affect housing affordability – and notably, to a greater extent than commonly held. Even so, their importance and perceived high level impact can be gauged from the unprecedented level of attention policy makers have given them over recent years. This may be evidenced by the embedding of specific strategies to address burgeoning holding costs (and particularly those cost savings associated with streamlining regulatory assessment) within statutory instruments such as the Queensland Housing Affordability Strategy, and the South East Queensland Regional Plan. However, several key issues require investigation. Firstly, the computation and methodology behind the calculation of holding costs varies widely. In fact, it is not only variable, but in some instances completely ignored. Secondly, some ambiguity exists in terms of the inclusion of various elements of holding costs, thereby affecting the assessment of their relative contribution. Perhaps this may in part be explained by their nature: such costs are not always immediately apparent. Some forms of holding costs are not as visible as the more tangible cost items associated with greenfield development such as regulatory fees, government taxes, acquisition costs, selling fees, commissions and others. Holding costs are also more difficult to evaluate since for the most part they must be ultimately assessed over time in an ever-changing environment, based on their strong relationship with opportunity cost which is in turn dependant, inter alia, upon prevailing inflation and / or interest rates. By extending research in the general area of housing affordability, this thesis seeks to provide a more detailed investigation of those elements related to holding costs, and in so doing determine the size of their impact specifically on the end user. This will involve the development of soundly based economic and econometric models which seek to clarify the componentry impacts of holding costs. Ultimately, there are significant policy implications in relation to the framework used in Australian jurisdictions that promote, retain, or otherwise maximise, the opportunities for affordable housing.

Liability of principal contractor for independent subcontractor considered by the High Court

Case note of Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd v Fox (2009) 258 ALR 673 ----- In Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd v Fox (2009) 83 ALJR 1086 ; 258 ALR 673 the High Court considered the liability of a principal contractor for the negligence of independent subcontractors on a building site. In its decision, the court considered the nature and the scope of the duty owed by principals to independent contractors.