seal

Court Case Record MARK SASSEVILLE vs. UNCLE SAM''S PIZZA OF WORCESTER, INC. & others 2013-P-0736 UID(9b17)


MARK SASSEVILLE vs. UNCLE SAM''S PIZZA OF WORCESTER, INC. & others Court Case Record

Court Case Number: 2013-P-0736


 
Case Number2013-P-0736
Case TitleMARK SASSEVILLE vs. UNCLE SAM''S PIZZA OF WORCESTER, INC. & others
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CountyWorcester
CourtWorcester Superior Court
Court Address
Phone
Field Date08/07/2007
Close Date07/29/2014

Parties

CounselNameType
Michael C. Meloche, Esquire Mark Raymond Joubert, EsquireMark SassevillePlaintiff/Appellee
Barry A. Bachrach, EsquireUncle Sam's Pizza of Worcester,Defendant/Appellant
Barry A. Bachrach, EsquireUncle Sam's Pizza, Inc.Defendant/Appellant
Barry A. Bachrach, EsquireSotirios GeorgiadisDefendant/Appellant
DOCKET ENTRIES
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
05/03/2013 #1 Entered.
05/03/2013 #2 Notice of entry sent.
06/11/2013 #3 SERVICE of brief & appendix-3 vols., 7 sets for Defendants/Appellants Uncle Sam's Pizza of Worcester, Inc., Uncle Sam's Pizza, Inc., & Sotirios Georgiadis.
07/08/2013 #4 MOTION to extend time, filed by Mark Sasseville.
07/09/2013 #5 RE#3: Extension to 08/09/2013 granted for filing of brief of Mark Sasseville, Plaintiff/Appellee. Notice to counsel.
08/09/2013 #6 SERVICE of brief for Plaintiff/Appellee Mark Sasseville.
08/23/2013 #7 SERVICE of reply brief for Defendants/Appellants Uncle Sam's Pizza of Worcester, Inc, Uncle Sam's Pizza, Inc and Sotirios Georgiadis
11/12/2013 Notice sent seeking information on unavailability for oral argument in January 2014
12/09/2013 Notice sent seeking information on unavailability for oral argument in February 2014
01/07/2014 Notice of 02/07/2014, 9:30 AM argument at John Adams Courthouse, Courtroom 4 (a4) sent.
02/07/2014 Oral argument held. (Trainor, J., Katzmann, J., Hanlon, J.).
07/01/2014 Decision: Rule 1:28 The order denying the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is reversed. The judgment as amended is reversed. The verdict as to the claim of fraud and misrepresentation is set aside, the finding of a violation of G. L. c. 93A is set aside, and judgment shall enter for the defendants on those claims. Judgment shall enter for the plaintiff on the breach of contract claim (Trainor, Katzmann & Hanlon, JJ.). *Notice.
07/29/2014 RESCRIPT to Trial Court.