seal

Court Case Record EDSON TELES MACHADO & others vs. NECCS, INC. & another 2012-J-0030 UID(ae38)


EDSON TELES MACHADO & others vs. NECCS, INC. & another Court Case Record

Court Case Number: 2012-J-0030


 
Case Number2012-J-0030
Case TitleEDSON TELES MACHADO & others vs. NECCS, INC. & another
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CountyNorfolk
CourtNorfolk Superior Court
Court Address
Phone
Field Date01/19/2012
Close Date01/31/2012

Parties

CounselNameType
Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esquire James W. Simpson, Jr., EsquireEdson Teles MachadoPlaintiff/Respondent
Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esquire James W. Simpson, Jr., EsquireJocliene DaSilvaPlaintiff/Respondent
Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esquire James W. Simpson, Jr., EsquireStenio FerreiraPlaintiff/Respondent
Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esquire James W. Simpson, Jr., EsquirePoliane SantosPlaintiff/Respondent
Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esquire James W. Simpson, Jr., EsquireGlaucea DeOliver SantosPlaintiff/Respondent
Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esquire James W. Simpson, Jr., EsquireLuiz SantosPlaintiff/Respondent
Eric H. Karp, EsquireNECCS, Inc.Defendant/Petitioner
Eric H. Karp, EsquireSystem4, LLCDefendant/Petitioner
DOCKET ENTRIES
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
01/19/2012 #1 Petition pursuant to M.G.L. c. 231, § 118 with attachments, filed by NECCS, Inc. d/b/a System4 of Boston, LLC., & System4, LLC.^
01/31/2012 #2 Opposition to Petition with attachments, filed by Edson Teles Machado, Jocliene DaSilva, Stenio Ferreira, Poliane Santos, Glaucea DeOlivera Santos, Luiz Santos.^
01/31/2012 #3 ORDER: NECCS, Inc., d/b/a System4 of Boston, LLC, and System4, LLC (collectively, System4), petitioned the Single Justice for interlocutory review, G. L. c. 231, § 118, of a denial of a motion to reconsider the denial of a motion to compel arbitration. In the alternative, System4 prayed for the Single Justice to report the case to a full panel of the Appeals Court pursuant to G. L. c. 231, § 112. See Cassidy v. Commissioner ofEnvtl. Mgmt., 7 Mass. App. Ct. 898. 898 (1979)("Generally a single justice of this court may report a case to the full Appeals Court in the same circumstances in which a single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court may report a case to the full bench of the Supreme Judicial Court."). Following the U. S. Supreme Court's decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 131 S. Ct. 1740 (2011), the issues presented in System4's petition present a question of first impression with regard to the Federal Arbitration Act's (FAA) preemptive effect on Massachusetts's statutory and decisional law prohibiting arbitration agreements that forbid class actions and class arbitration. Compare Concepcion, supra with Feeney v. Dell Inc., 454 Mass. 192 (2009) and G. L. c. 93A, §§ 9 (2) & 11. Accordingly, I allow the request for referral of the case to a full panel of this Court. As the trial court docket indicates a notice of appeal from the denial of System4's motion for reconsideration was filed in the trial court on January 12, 2012, the trial court is to assemble the record, and upon notice of assembly of the record, System4 is to enter the appeal pursuant to Mass. R. App. P. 10(a), after which the appeal is to proceed in due course. (Grainger, J.). Notice/attest/Brady, J.
02/17/2012 Copy of DAR application of Edson Teles Machado, Jocliene DaSilva, Stenio Ferreira, Poliane Santos, Glaucea DeOlivera Santos, Luiz Santos.