A man charged with "upskirting" a woman on the Green Line in 2010 - and captured the next day by a decoy T cop in a skirt of her own - wants the Supreme Judicial Court to toss the charges, saying the law used to prosecute him was only meant to protect women in the shower or dressing rooms, not to people practicing the First Amendment in public.

The Supreme Judicial Court today overturned a judge's refusal to reduce a filing fee required in medical-malpractice case for two poor families.

In both cases, the judge said the families were so poor they couldn't possibly afford the $6,000 fee, that therefore, their lawyers must be picking up the fee in the hopes of winning settlements and so making them pay the full fee wouldn't affect their ability to continue in court because the lawyers could front the money.

The Supreme Judicial Court today slapped a Dedham company that fired a worker because it didn't want to bear the insurance costs of his wife's brain-tumor treatment.

Marc Flagg sued AliMed under the state's anti-discrimination law, arguing that firing him for taking care of his wife and their daughter amounted to workplace discrimination. A lower-court judge dismissed his claim, but the court's ruling today reinstates it.

The Supreme Judicial Court ruled today a man arrested by a Smith College police officer will have to stand trial for operating under the influence even though his alleged infraction happened on a street not owned by the college.

The state's highest court noted that state law gives campus police officers the right to patrol and make arrests on land which their college makes "use." The court said this applied to the Northampton road on which the Smith officer first noticed Steven Smeaton allegedly driving erratically because it is the only way to access a Smith parking garage and other college buildings and facilities.

The Supreme Judicial Court ruled today that a man who outgrew his violent neighborhood to become a respectable member of society still cannot legally own a concealed weapon in Boston for self protection, even though he sometimes carries large amounts of cash.

The Supreme Judicial Court ruled today that doctors' first responsibility is to their patients, not to the public at large.

The decision comes in suit by a man who wanted damages from a Mass. General neurologist whose patient suffered a seizure and crashed into him.

Richard Medina required multiple operations to repair the arm damage done in the 2001 crash and said Dr. Fred Hochberg should have done more to keep his patient, Robert Riskind, who had inoperable brain cancer, off the road:

The Supreme Judicial Court ruled today a Boston police officer should not have searched the glove compartment of a car he had stopped in Dorchester because he failed to provide evidence he needed to search the car immediately to protect either his own or the public's safety.

The ruling upholds the decision of a Boston Municipal Court judge to disallow the gun and ammunition, which might make it tough for prosecutors to continue charging the couple in the car with illegal possession of a loaded firearm with a defaced serial number and illegal possession of a large capacity feeding device.

The Supreme Judicial Court today vacated an order that had prevented a British man from seeing the then 16-year-old Massachusetts girl with whom he had had a dalliance while she and her family were on a European vacation.

After the family returned to the US, the two continued exchanging romantic messages via e-mail and Skype - even after the girl admitted she was only 16 and not 18 - and Gregory James Compton, then 24, eventually booked a flight to Boston in October, 2011, to spend more time with his stateside sweetie.

The Supreme Judicial Court ruled today that a chain of arts and craft stores violated a state consumer-privacy law when it used a woman's Zip code on her credit-card transaction to figure out where she lived and start bombarding her with circulars.

The opinion, however, does not mean Melissa Tyler gets anything, because her suit against Michaels is in federal court and the state's highest court was merely providing answers about state consumer-laws to a federal judge hearing her case - where the ultimate decision will come.