45 Walker Street
   Bishop House Offices
   Lenox, MA 01240
   Telephone (413) 637-2777    Facsimile (413) 637-1640
   Email:
   inquiries@pumphreylaw.com

Select & Sample Cases

Commonwealth v. Colleran, 452 Mass. 417 (2008)
My client, a young mother who suffered from bipolar disorder and who was not taking her medication, was convicted of first degree murder of her child.  She was found incompetent to stand trial for several months.  For the first time in almost twenty years, the Supreme Judicial Court invoked its authority under G.L. c. 278, section 33E.  That section gives the SJC the power to reduce a verdict in a first degree murder case, if, after plenary review, the SJC decides that a reduced verdict is more consonant with justice.  In the Colleran case, the SJC reduced the verdict from first to second degree murder where mental illness was a factor. 

Commonwealth v. Coren, 437 Mass. 723 (2002)
The Supreme Judicial Court reversed the Defendant's conviction of first degree murder and also his conviction of unlawful possession of a firearm.  The Court, Cordy, J., held that the prosecutor's errors during closing argument in misstating evidence constituted reversible error and also that the evidence was  insufficient to support the finding that defendant possessed gun outside of his residence.  This case has been cited almost 250 times since its decision.

Commonwealth v. Clyde Dempsey, 49 Mass. App. Ct. 247 (2000)
The Defendant in this case was apprehended in Canada because of the television show "America's Most Wanted."  The Appeals Court, Armstrong, C.J., reversed the conviction of second degree murder and held erroneous the jury instruction that, to prove the lesser included offense of voluntary manslaughter, the Commonwealth had the affirmative burden to prove that defendant killed victim as a result of sudden combat in the heat of passion

In Re Custody of Kali, 439 Mass. 834 (2003)
The Supreme Judicial Court held that, in a custody case between unmarried parents, the touchstone issue is best interests of the child.   This case has been cited almost 100 times since its decision.

Onofrio v. Department of Mental Health, 411 Mass. 657 (1992)
In a case of first impression, the Supreme Court held that post-judgment interest is not recoverable under the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act.

Robidoux v. O'Brien, U.S.D.C. Civil Action No. 1:08-cv-11046 
Reported at 450 Mass. 144 (2007)
In this case, which was the subject of much national media attention, including an hour long television documentary on "Twenty Twenty," my client was a member of a religious cult who was convicted of first degree murder for withholding food from his child.  On appeal, I argued that trial counsel was ineffective where he failed to have his client evaluated for competence resulting in the Defendant's trial in an incompetent state, failed to assert an insanity defense where he knew that his client was unable to comply with the law and did not understand that his actions were wrong, and he failed to put forward expert testimony or request an instruction on the impairment of the Defendant's ability to make decisions in a normal manner.  This case is now pending on the denial of my habeas corpus petition in the First Circuit  Court of Appeals.

Robert Wade v. Bernard Brady, U.S.D.C. Civil Action No. 04-12135-NG
Reported 460 F.Supp.2d 226 (D.Mass. 2006)
In a fifty-page decision, the District Court (Gertner, J.) denied the government's Motion to Dismiss, holding that my client was denied meaningful access to courts, post-conviction, by withholding access to potentially favorable DNA evidence.  The Court allowed my client’s first summary judgment motion, and the case is pending on a second summary judgment motion in the federal District Court and is stayed in the First Circuit Court of Appeals. 

Connors v. Northeast Hospital, 439 Mass. 469 (2003)
This case involved an accident in an icy parking lot at a hospital, and the plaintiff's judgment was reduced under the charitable immunity cap.  We argued that the hospital failed to establish its burden of proving the affirmative defense because the hospital was functioning as commercial enterprise, unrelated to a charitable purpose.  On direct appellate review, the Supreme Judicial Court, Marshall, C.J., held that, for purposes of the charitable immunity statutory cap, an institution will be classed as charitable if the dominant purpose of its work is for the public good, and the work done for it members is but the means adopted for this  purpose.  This case has been cited almost 100 times since its decision.

United States v. Santiago, 560 F.3d 62 (2009), cert. denied, 2009 WL 1615695
To the First Circuit Court of Appeals and to the United States Supreme Court in my petition for certiorari, I argued that the District Court's admission of coded language testimony by an investigating officer was error where the officer was not qualified as an expert, where he had no expertise, and where the testimony was highly speculative.  Notwithstanding split circuits on this issue, the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari.

Foley v. Morris, 68 Mass. App. Ct. 1107 (2007)
This case involved a petition to partition.  In ruling for my client, the Appeals Court held that procedural irregularities required the Probate Court to vacate its interlocutory order.  The Appeals Court based its decision on the fact that the Probate Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and the transcript of the trial court proceeding were not provided to the Single Justice