seal

Court Case Record MADELINE DUHAMEL vs. CARDIOLOGY CONSULTANTS & others 2006-J-0014 UID(e81a)


MADELINE DUHAMEL vs. CARDIOLOGY CONSULTANTS & others Court Case Record

Court Case Number: 2006-J-0014


 
Case Number2006-J-0014
Case TitleMADELINE DUHAMEL vs. CARDIOLOGY CONSULTANTS & others
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CountyWorcester
CourtWorcester Superior Court
Court Address
Phone
Field Date01/09/2006
Close Date01/10/2006

Parties

CounselNameType
Stephen J. Gordon, EsquireMadeline DuhamelPlaintiff/Petitioner
Jeffrey P. Weber, EsquireCardiology ConsultantsDefendant/Respondent
Jeffrey P. Weber, EsquireDavid Lyons, M.D.Defendant/Respondent
Jeffrey P. Weber, EsquireRichard Wholey, M.D.Defendant/Respondent
Jeffrey P. Weber, EsquireRichard Angoff, M.D.Defendant/Respondent
Jeffrey P. Weber, EsquireJoshua Macomber, M.D.Defendant/Respondent
Jeffrey P. Weber, EsquireClifford Browning, M.D.Defendant/Respondent
DOCKET ENTRIES
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
01/09/2006 #1 PETITION purs to GLc 231, s. 118 w/attach, filed by Madeline Duhamel.
01/10/2006 #2 ORDER: "...In Fabre v. Walton...court held...denial of...defendant's special motion to dismiss, pursuant to G. L. c. 231; sec. 59H...is immediately appealable...plaintiff...must file...notice of appeal in...trial court..." (Rapoza, J.) *Notice/Attest/McCann, J./Image.
01/25/2006 #3 Motion to reconsider paper #2 filed by Madeline Duhamel.
01/26/2006 RE#3: When Fabre v. Walton, 436 Mass. 517 (2002) was initially released by the Reporter as a slip opinion, the court explicitly indicated that "an interlocutory appeal should proceed to the Appeals Court pursuant to G. L. c. 231, sec. 118." That instruction was amended prior to the publication of the advance sheets to provide that "an interlocutory appeal...should proceed to the Appeals Court regardless of the court in which the SLAPP suit was brought", deleting reference to G. L. c. 231, sec. 118. *Notice.