seal

Court Case Record COUTO MANAGEMENT GROUP LLC vs. TRUSTEES OF THE HALL REALTY TRUST 2011-J-0187 UID(a8fa)


COUTO MANAGEMENT GROUP LLC vs. TRUSTEES OF THE HALL REALTY TRUST Court Case Record

Court Case Number: 2011-J-0187


 
Case Number2011-J-0187
Case TitleCOUTO MANAGEMENT GROUP LLC vs. TRUSTEES OF THE HALL REALTY TRUST
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CountyMiddlesex
CourtMiddlesex Superior Court
Court Address
Phone
Field Date05/05/2011
Close Date05/17/2011

Parties

CounselNameType
Nicholas B. Carter, EsquireCouto Management Group LLCPlaintiff/Respondent
William H. Sheehan, III, EsquireTrustees of the Hall Realty TrustDefendant/Petitioner
DOCKET ENTRIES
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
05/05/2011 #1 Petition pursuant to M.G.L. c. 231, § 118 with attachments, filed by Trustees of the Hall Realty Trust.
05/10/2011 #2 Copy of Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration of April 6 Orders; Plaintiff's Opposition to the Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration of April 6 Oders and The Trial Court's May 6, 2011 Order denying the Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration, received from Atty Alexis V. D'Arcy.
05/12/2011 #3 Memorandum in Support of Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration of April 6, 2011 Orders Denying Special Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Dissolve Memorandum of Lis Pendens Received from William H. Sheehan III (by Fax).
05/17/2011 #4 ORDER: The petitioner, Trustees of the Hall Realty Trust, entered a petition pursuant to G. L. c. 231, § 118 (par. 1), on May 5, 2011, seeking relief from a Single Justice from orders of the Superior Court (Kern, J.), entered on April 6, 2011, denying, after hearing, its motion to dissolve the ex parte memorandum of lis pendens issued in this action and its special motion to dismiss counts three and six of the plaintiff's complaint, both filed pursuant to G. L. c. 184, § 15(c). The trial court denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration of its orders on May 5, 2011. The petition requests that the Single Justice reverse the Superior Court's order denying their motion to dissolve the ex parte memorandum of lis pendens. After review of the petition and the papers filed in the trial court, I discern no error of law or abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court judge in denying the motion. The petition also requests that the single justice reverse the order of the Superior Court which denied the defendants' special motion to dismiss two counts of the plaintiff's complaint. Pursuant to § 118, par. 1, the Single Justice's authority is limited by Mass.R.App.P. 15(c). The relief requested must be denied because it is outcome determinative. See Mass.R.App.P. 15(c) ("a single justice may not dismiss or otherwise determine an appeal or other proceeding"). Finally, although G. L. c. 184, § 15(d) provides that "[a]ny party aggrieved by a ruling under subsection (c) or by the denial of an ex parte motion for a memorandum of lis pendens, may appeal pursuant to the first or second paragraphs of section 118 of chapter 231," it is noted that a notice of appeal from the trial court's orders has not been filed in the trial court. (Kantrowitz, J.). Notice/attest/Kern, J./image