seal

Court Case Record TOWN OF DUXBURY vs. ROBERT TROY 2013-P-0600 UID(78ea)


TOWN OF DUXBURY vs. ROBERT TROY Court Case Record

Court Case Number: 2013-P-0600


 
Case Number2013-P-0600
Case TitleTOWN OF DUXBURY vs. ROBERT TROY
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CountyPlymouth
CourtPlymouth Superior Court
Court Address
Phone
Field Date07/18/2012
Close Date01/06/2014

Parties

CounselNameType
Evan C. Ouellette, Esquire Inactive Arthur P. Kreiger, Esquire Leonard H. Kesten, EsquireTown of DuxburyPlaintiff/Appellee
William Robert Covino, Esquire Allen N. David, EsquireRobert TroyDefendant/Appellant
DOCKET ENTRIES
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
04/09/2013 #1 Entered.
04/09/2013 #2 Notice of entry sent.
04/17/2013 #3 Memo: Notice of entry sent to Attorney William Robert Covino returned as "attempted not known - unable to forward." Firm name added and notice resent.
04/23/2013 #4 Notice of appearance of Allen N. David for Robert Troy.
05/16/2013 #5 SERVICE of 7 briefs & 7 appendices for Defendant/Appellant Robert Troy.
06/17/2013 #6 MOTION to extend brief due date of Town of Duxbury.
06/17/2013 #7 RE#4: Allowed to 06/21/13. Notice
06/21/2013 #8 SERVICE of brief for Plaintiff/Appellee Town of Duxbury.
06/27/2013 #9 MOTION to extend reply brief due date, filed by Robert Troy.
06/27/2013 #10 RE#6: Allowed to 07/12/13. *Notice.
07/12/2013 SERVICE of reply brief for Defendant/Appellant Robert Troy.
09/12/2013 Notice sent seeking information on unavailability for oral argument in November 2013
10/10/2013 Notice of 11/13/2013, 9:30 AM argument at John Adams Courthouse, Courtroom 4 (a4) sent.
10/21/2013 Notice of appearance of Leonard H. Kesten for Town of Duxbury^
11/13/2013 Oral argument held. (Kantrowitz, J., Graham, J., Meade, J.).
01/06/2014 ORDER OF DISMISSAL: This interlocutory matter concerns the denial of Robert S. Troy's motion to disqualify current town counsel in litigation the town has brought against Troy as the town's former counsel. Troy claims we have jurisdiction to resolve this appeal under the doctrine of present execution. See Borman v. Borman, 378 Mass. 775, 779-780 (1979). We disagree. Without authorization from a single justice, only orders allowing motions to disqualify may be immediately appealed under the doctrine. See Masiello v. Perini Corp., 394 Mass. 842, 850 (1985). Although we are sensitive to Troy's desire to resolve this matter now, we are without jurisdiction to do so.[1] Appeal dismissed (Kantrowitz, Graham & Meade, JJ.). Notice/attest/Hely, J. Footnotes [1] The town's request for attorney's fees and double costs is denied.