Your case is unique, but you are not alone.

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 your attorney

    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 and we don’t recommend changing your attorney — that’s a conversation for you and them. We just show you what the record already says.

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

Case Information

Filed 2023-05-25
Status Closed
Type Miscellaneous|Eqa Equitable Action Involving Any Right, Title Or Interest In Land, G.l. Chapter 185, § 1 (k)
Docket 27 entries

Parties

Plaintiff Kristine M. Boyle, As|Lynch, Leigh A.|Boyle, Kristine M.|Mc Laughlin, Beth D.|Mc Laughlin, Robert E.
Defendant Mc Laughlin, Walter K.

Lawyers

Docket Entries

  1. Complaint filed.
  2. Case assigned to the Average Track per Land Court Standing Order 1:04.
  3. Land Court miscellaneous filing fee Receipt: 441329 Date: 05/25/2023
  4. Land Court surcharge Receipt: 441329 Date: 05/25/2023
  5. Land Court summons Receipt: 441329 Date: 05/25/2023
  6. Summons and Hearing Notice issued on Application for Preliminary Injunction. Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Event: Hearing on Preliminary Injunction Date: 06/08/2023 Time: 11:00 AM
  7. Uniform Counsel Certificate for Civil Cases filed by Plaintiff.
  8. Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, filed.
  9. Appearance of Bart W Heemskerk, Esq. for Walter K. McLaughlin, filed
  10. Plaintiff's Verified Memorandum In Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction, filed.
  11. Event Resulted: Hearing on Preliminary Injunction scheduled on: 06/08/2023 11:00 AM Has been: Rescheduled Hon. Kevin T. Smith, Presiding
  12. Summons and Hearing Notice issued on Application for Preliminary Injunction. Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Event: Hearing on Preliminary Injunction VIA ZOOM Date: 06/15/2023 Time: 09:00 AM Email notice to: Attorney Robert E. McLaughlin and Attorney Bart W. Heemskerk.
  13. Summons returned to Court with service on Walter K. McLaughlin filed. 06/05/2023: Service Accepted by Attorney Bart Heemskerk.
  14. Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Disqualify Counsel, filed.
  15. Affidavit of Counsel, filed.
  16. Amendment to Verified Complaint as a Matter of Course, filed.
  17. Verified Motion to Strike, filed.
  18. Defendant Walter K. McLaughlin's Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction, filed.
  19. Affidavit of Walter K. McLaughlin, filed.
  20. Defendant Walter K. McLaughlin's Motion to Disqualify Robert E. McLaughlin, Sr. and Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan LLP Emergency, filed.
  21. Event Resulted: Hearing on Preliminary Injunction scheduled on: 06/15/2023 09:00 AM Has been: Held via video Hon. Kevin T. Smith, Presiding June 15, 2023. Motion hearing held via videoconference. Attorney Robert McLaughlin appeared for the plaintiffs. Attorney Bart Heemskerk appeared for the defendants. Before the court were plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction, defendant's opposition to preliminary injunction, defendant's emergency motion to disqualify counsel, and plaintiffs' opposition to the motion to disqualify. The defendant's opposition included a challenge to the jurisdiction of the Land Court due to the partnership and nominee trust at the center of this case. Defendant argues that the Land Court is without jurisdiction because the complaint asks the court to interpret a partnership agreement. Plaintiffs argue that, although the partnership agreement is at the center of the dispute, the agreement itself pertains to and affects a right or title in real property, and therefore jurisdiction is proper in the Land Court. Following argument, the defendant indicated intent to file a motion to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds. Defendant's motion to dismiss should be filed with the court no later than Tuesday, June 20, 2023. Plaintiffs' opposition will be due on June 30, 2023. The court will rule on the motion promptly. Should the court deny the motion to dismiss, the court will revisit the plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction at that time. (Smith, J.).
  22. Defendant Walter K. McLaughlin's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction MASS.R.VIV.P 12(b)(1), filed.
  23. Defendant Walter K. McLaughlin's Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction MASS.R.CIV.P 12(b)(1) or for Transfer to Superior Court, filed.
  24. Notice of Docket Entry: Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Plaintiff: Robert E McLaughlin, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Bart W Heemskerk, Esq. [email protected] Sent On: 06/21/2023 09:23:00
  25. Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, filed.
  26. Decision on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, issued. (Copies emailed to Attorneys Robert McLaughlin and Bart Heemskerk) Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T.
  27. Judgment. (Copies emailed to Attorneys Robert McLaughlin and Bart Heemskerk) Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T.

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.

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.