seal

Court Case Record DARI FARMS ICE CREAM CO., INC. vs. CONSUMER PRODUCT DISTRIBUTORS, INC. D/B/A 2011-J-0151 UID(1a6f)


DARI FARMS ICE CREAM CO., INC. vs. CONSUMER PRODUCT DISTRIBUTORS, INC. D/B/A Court Case Record

Court Case Number: 2011-J-0151


 
Case Number2011-J-0151
Case TitleDARI FARMS ICE CREAM CO., INC. vs. CONSUMER PRODUCT DISTRIBUTORS, INC. D/B/A
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CountyPlymouth
CourtPlymouth Superior Court
Court Address
Phone
Field Date04/15/2011
Close Date04/25/2011

Parties

CounselNameType
Lawrence G. Green, EsquireDari Farms Ice Cream Co., Inc.Plaintiff/Petitioner
Dawn D. McDonald, EsquireConsumer Product Distributors, IDefendant/Respondent
DOCKET ENTRIES
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
04/15/2011 #1 Petition pursuant to M.G.L. c. 231, § 118 with attachments, filed by Dari Farms Ice Cream Co., Inc.
04/20/2011 #2 Opposition to Petition with attachments, filed by Consumer Product Distributors, Inc. D/B/A J. Polep Distribution Services.
04/25/2011 #3 ORDER: The petitioner, Dari Farms Ice Cream Co., Inc., has filed a petition, pursuant to G. L. c. 231, § 118 (first para.), seeking review of an Order of the Superior Court denying petitioner's request for injunctive relief. A request for a preliminary injunction is addressed to the discretion of the trial court judge, and a single justice will not interfere with the exercise of that discretion in the absence of a clear error of law or abuse of discretion. See Jet-Line Services, Inc. v. Board of Selectmen of Stoughton, 25 Mass. App. Ct. 645, 646 (1988). The petition and the materials submitted in support of it do not demonstrate that the Superior Court judge applied a legally incorrect standard or abused his discretion in denying the requested injunction. Although the single justice possesses the plenary authority to review the trial court's action on an application for preliminary relief, doing so is a matter of single justice discretion. "In most cases, based on the deference normally accorded determinations by the judge who heard the matter in the first instance, the single justice will decline to act on an application for relief under G. L. c. 231, § 118, first par., that does not disclose clear error of law or abuse of discretion." Jet-Line Services, Inc. v. Board of Selectmen of Stoughton, 25 Mass. App. Ct. 645, 646 (1988). See also Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, Inc. v. Operation Rescue, 406 Mass. 701, 709-710 (1990). "[S]ingle justices ... exercise[ ] their discretion [at the preliminary injunction stage] sparingly and only in situations where a petitioner has shown clear entitlement to relief. " Edwin R. Sage Co. v. Foley, 12 Mass. App. Ct. 20, 25, (1981). Upon consideration of the petition and the papers filed in support of and in opposition thereto, no entitlement has been shown. Consequently, the petition is denied (Fecteau, J.). Notice/attest/Cosgrove, J./image