Which Lawyers Win Before Your Judge?

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know Your Judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know The Lawyers

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know Your Court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase
Photo of Massachusetts Unified County

Court

Massachusetts Unified County

Massachusetts

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2022-12-20
Status Open
Type Torts|Fraud, Business Torts, Etc.
Docket 32 entries

Parties

Plaintiff Todd Trifone, Individually And Derivatively
Defendant Capillo, Guy

Lawyers

Docket Entries

  1. Attorney appearance On this date Mark E Burke, Esq. added for Plaintiff Todd Trifone
  2. Case assigned to: DCM Track A - Average was added on 12/20/2022
  3. Original civil complaint filed.
  4. Civil action cover sheet filed.
  5. Demand for jury trial entered.
  6. Todd Trifone's MOTION for appointment of Special Process Server. Under Rule 4
  7. Endorsement on Motion for appointment of special process server (#3.0): ALLOWED
  8. Service Returned for Defendant Capillo, Guy: Service through person in charge / agent;
  9. Todd Trifone's request for Default 55(a) Applies To: Capillo, Guy (Defendant)
  10. VACATED/// Entered as to: Defendant Capillo, Guy: Defaulted by 55(a) request
  11. Document: A Default order Mass. R. Civ. P. 55(a) was generated and sent to: Plaintiff, Attorney: Mark E Burke, Esq. Law Office of Mark E. Burke Executive Place 50 Mall Road Suite 208, Burlington, MA 01803
  12. Defendant Guy Capillo's Assented to Motion to remove Default
  13. Endorsement on Motion to remove (#7.0): ALLOWED
  14. Answer with a counterclaim Applies To: Capillo, Guy (Defendant) ///////////////////////////AMENDED COMPLAINT WAS FILED (IN HAND) PRIOR TO THE EFILING OF THE ANSWER WITH A COUNTERCLAIM - THE ANSWER WITH A COUNTERCLAIM (PAPER #8) IS NOT THE OPERATIVE OR VALID RESPONSIVE PLEADING - DEFENDANT COUNSEL HAS BEEN INFORMED AND WILL BE FILING AN ANSWER IN RESPONSE TO THE AMENDED COMPLAINT [#9] WHICH IS THE OPERATIVE COMPLAINT IN THIS MATTER///////////////////////////////////
  15. Amended: amended complaint filed by Todd Trifone
  16. Docket Note: Plaintiff counsel hand filed an Amended Complaint in person in the Salem Superior Court on 2/10/23 @ approximately 12:30 PM. In accordance with office protocol, the Amended Complaint was date/time stamped and then placed in the inter-office mail for delivery to the Lawrence Superior Court (where the C Session is located) for docketing. Prior to the Amended Complaint's arrival in Lawrence, the Defendant e-filed an Answer with a Counterclaim to the Plaintiff's Original Complaint on 2/10/23 @ approximately 6:30 PM. Plaintiff Counsel indicates that he was not served with the Answer with a Counterclaim prior to the hand-filing of the Amended Complaint in Salem. Defendant's e-filed Answer with a Counterclaim was processed and docketed in error as the filed-but-not-yet-docketed Amended Complaint had not yet arrived via inter-office mail in Lawrence. As no responsive pleading had been served upon Plaintiff prior to the hand-filing of the Amended Complaint, the Amended Complaint [Paper #9] is the operative pleading in this matter. Defense Counsel has been informed that they will need to file an Answer to the Amended Complaint as the previously filed Answer with a Counterclaim [Paper #8] was entered in error and cannot act as the operative responsive pleading in this matter.
  17. Answer to amended complaint and counterclaim Applies To: Capillo, Guy (Defendant)
  18. other document, returned SERVED Officers Affidavit and Proof of Service of Process Applies To: Capillo, Guy (Defendant)
  19. Received from Defendant Todd Trifone, Individually and Derivatively on behalf of Trifone and Capillo Construction, LLC: Answer to the Counterclaim;
  20. Plaintiff Todd Trifone, Individually and Derivatively on behalf of Trifone and Capillo Construction, LLC's Motion for Short Order Notice The Plaintiff, Todd Trifone, individually and derivatively on behalf of Trifone & Capillo Construction, LLC moves that this Honorable Court issue a Summons and Order of Notice that Defendant appear for a hearing on Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, filed herewith. Plaintiff requests that said hearing be held on May 26, 2023. Applies To: Todd Trifone, Individually and Derivatively on behalf of Trifone and Capillo Construction, LLC (Plaintiff)
  21. Plaintiff Todd Trifone, Individually and Derivatively on behalf of Trifone and Capillo Construction, LLC's Motion for Preliminary Injunction Applies To: Todd Trifone, Individually and Derivatively on behalf of Trifone and Capillo Construction, LLC (Plaintiff)
  22. Plaintiff Todd Trifone, Individually and Derivatively on behalf of Trifone and Capillo Construction, LLC's Memorandum in Support of Motion For Preliminary Injunction (Exhibits Attached)
  23. Affidavit of Todd Trifone Applies To: Todd Trifone, Individually and Derivatively on behalf of Trifone and Capillo Construction, LLC (Plaintiff) (Exhibits Attached)
  24. Endorsement on Motion for Short Order (#13.0): DENIED After review, denied without prejudice. This case is in the midst of on-going litigation. There appears to be no emergency and the defendant has already answered the complaint. The Court sees no reason why the current motion cannot be served and filed pursuant to Rule 9A and heard in the ordinary course of business.
  25. Plaintiff(s) Todd Trifone, Individually and Derivatively on behalf of Trifone and Capillo Construction, LLC's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction
  26. Todd Trifone, Individually and Derivatively on behalf of Trifone and Capillo Construction, LLC's Memorandum in support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction
  27. Affidavit of Todd Trifone
  28. Affidavit of Taylor Trifone
  29. Affidavit of compliance with Superior Court Rule 9A Applies To: Burke, Esq., Mark E (Attorney) on behalf of Todd Trifone, Individually and Derivatively on behalf of Trifone and Capillo Construction, LLC (Plaintiff)
  30. Rule 9A list of documents filed.
  31. Rule 9A notice of filing
  32. Certificate of service of attorney or Pro Se: Mark E Burke, Esq.

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

One-time payment, no subscription. Reports describe past public court activity — they don’t predict outcomes and they aren’t legal advice.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

Featured in Forbes, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Above The Law, American Bar Association, and more