3 3 The area in question was once the site of Orchard Park, a public housing project owned by the Boston Housing Authority (BHA). We view the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the nonmoving party.
The history of that development plays a prominent role in the plaintiff's claims, and we therefore begin by briefly recounting it. The shooting took place on a public road within the housing development known as Orchard Gardens. On summary judgment, a Superior Court judge ruled in the defendants' favor, agreeing that, as a matter of law, they owed no such duties to the decedent in the circumstances of this case. She claimed that the defendants caused her injuries by failing both to provide adequate security in the area and to warn her about the dangers there. Holloway brought negligence claims against Madison Trinity Limited Partnership and Trinity Management, LLC, the entities that operated the housing development adjacent to the site of the shooting. Those responsible for the shooting were never identified or apprehended. She became paralyzed from her injuries and eventually died from complications related to them. While sitting on her parked motor scooter on a public sidewalk in the Roxbury section of Boston, Detra Holloway was the victim of a drive-by shooting. We refer to Detra Holloway as the decedent, and her daughter as the plaintiff. Holloway, continued the action as personal representative of her mother's estate. After Detra Holloway died, her daughter, Khadijah M.
Wilson, J., on a motion for summary judgment, and motions to reopen evidence and for reconsideration also were considered by him. Civil action commenced in the Superior Court Department on March 18, 2016. Negligence, One owning or controlling real estate, Duty to prevent harm, Duty to warn, Use of way, Security services.
MADISON TRINITY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP & another. If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750 (617) 5571030 18-P-1323 Appeals Court DETRA HOLLOWAY1 vs. 6.NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports. Here are the YouTube stars who fell out of the top 10 ranking this time around. Some household names remain popular but have had to make way for new rising stars. From policy updates to changing viewer trends, a channel can go from always trending to struggling to get views. The channel was slapped with a Federal Trade Commission complaint over allegations of deceptive advertising to its primary audience (children and toddlers) and of failing to properly disclose sponsored content.Īs you can tell, the YouTube landscape has changed a lot over the last year.
Ryan’s World has 28 million subscribers, leading to sponsorships and partnerships - like his own line of toothbrushes and toothpaste by Colgate.īut it's these sponsorships that landed the young toy reviewer and his parents in trouble. He earned 560 times the average American's annual salary ($53,490 in 2019 ). The then 3-year-old posted his first toy unboxing and review of a Lego train set - a video that now has over 50 million views.įast-forward to today, this kid's most-viewed video on Ryan’s World has over 2 billion views and he's now the highest-earning YouTuber, according to Forbes. Ryan Kaji's parents started a YouTube channel for him in 2015, called Ryan ToysReview.