Court Case Record LEROY & CO INC vs. CITY OF WORCESTER 2011-P-1409 UID(508b)


Court Case Number: 2011-P-1409

Case Number2011-P-1409
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CourtWorcester Superior Court
Court Address
Field Date05/10/2006
Close Date02/03/2014


Benjamin C. Rudolf, Esquire Roy A. Bourgeois, EsquireLeroy & Co IncPlaintiff/Appellant
Wendy L. Quinn, EsquireCity of WorcesterDefendant/Appellee
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
08/11/2011 #1 Entered.
08/11/2011 #2 Notice of entry sent.
08/18/2011 #3 Docketing Statement received from Leroy & Co Inc.
09/21/2011 #4 SERVICE of brief & appendix- 7 sets for Plaintiff/Appellant Leroy & Co., Inc.
10/06/2011 #5 Motion for enlargement of time to file a brief to 12/20/11, filed by City of Worcester.
10/06/2011 #6 RE#4: Extension to 12/20/2011 granted for filing of brief of City of Worcester, Defendant/Appellee. Notice to counsel.
12/19/2011 #7 SERVICE of brief for Defendant/Appellee City of Worcester.^
03/05/2012 #8 Notice of 04/02/2012, 9:30 AM argument at Western New England Law School (wnel) sent.
04/02/2012 #9 Oral argument held. (Trainor, J., Smith, J., Sullivan, J.).
08/10/2012 #10 Decision: Rule 1:28 Judgment affirmed (Trainor, Smith, Sullivan, JJ.). *Notice.
09/04/2012 #11 Copy of FAR application of Leroy & Co Inc.
07/08/2013 #12 SJC Order: The plaintiff's application for further appellate review is denied without prejudice, and the case is remanded to the Appeals Court for further consideration in light of Shapiro v. City of Worcester, 464 Mass. 261 (2013).^
07/29/2013 #13 PETITION for Rehearing, filed by Leroy & Co Inc.@
08/13/2013 ORDER: By order dated July 8, 2013, the Supreme Judicial Court remanded this matter to this court for further consideration in light of Shapiro v. Worcester, 464 Mass. 261 (2013). The appellant has since filed a motion for reconsideration of our earlier disposition of this matter. As a result of the decision in Shapiro the panel will consider additional issues not previously addressed in its prior decision. Resolution of these issues will require consideration of relevant cases decided since this matter was first briefed. Accordingly, the parties shall file supplemental briefing on or before September 17, 2013 addressing (1) the applicability, if any, of Shapiro, supra, at 265 n.4, and Barrows v. Wareham Fire District, 82 Mass. App. Ct. 623 (2012) to the question whether a non-negligent trespass(1) is an intentional tort within the meaning of G. L. c. 258, ยง 10(c), and (2) whether, if a claim for intentional trespass is cognizable under the MTCA, the evidence is sufficient to support the verdict. The parties shall cooperate in the preparation of a Supplemental Record Appendix which shall contain those trial exhibits upon which either party relies, or are referred to in any portion of the transcript upon which either party relies. (Cypher, Trainor & Sullivan, JJ.) *Notice. Footnote: (1) The plaintiff waived any claim of negligent trespass at trial.
09/17/2013 SERVICE of supplemental brief for Defendant/Appellee City of Worcester. @
09/18/2013 SERVICE of supplemental brief & supplemental appendix for Plaintiff/Appellant Leroy & Co Inc. @
12/20/2013 Revised Decision: Rule 1:28 Judgment notwithstanding the verdict affirmed (Trainor, Cypher & Sullivan, JJ.). *Notice.
01/13/2014 Copy of FAR application of Leroy & Co Inc.
02/03/2014 FAR DENIED (on 01/30/2014) as to Renewed application filed after remand.
02/03/2014 RESCRIPT to Trial Court.