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.
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
2024-02-15
Status
Open
Type
Case Transferred From Other Court To The Permit Session
Docket
14 entries
Parties
Plaintiff
Farkes, Allison|Wernerfelt, Birger|Johnson, Dan|Tougias, George|Coval, Josh|Walker, Kaaren|Roche, Lara M.|Savona, Leonard|Kelley, Robert|O'neil, Robin|Kelley, Wendy|Shaffer, William F.
Defendant
648 Canton Avenue Llc|Hurley, Brian|Comprehensive Land Holding Llc|Brown, Michael|Milton Zoning Board Of Appeals|Daiber, Theadore E.|Town Of Milton
Lawyers
Docket Entries
- Case transferred to the Permit Session.
- Complaint filed in the Permit Session.
- Event Scheduled Judge: Rubin, Hon. Diane R. Event: Case Management Conference Date: 03/18/2024 Time: 09:30 AM
- Plaintiffs' Request for Leave to File Sur-Reply for Motion to Dismiss, filed.
- Private Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File a Sur-Reply Regarding the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, filed.
- Motion for Protective Order Staying all Discovery pending a Ruling on the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, filed.
- Motion to Compel, filed.
- Affidavit, filed.
- Event Resulted: Case Management Conference scheduled on: 03/18/2024 09:30 AM Has been: Canceled Hon. Diane R. Rubin, Presiding
- Notice of Docket Entry: This Case has been RE-ASSIGNED to the Hon. Kevin T. Smith. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Plaintiff: Daniel C Hill, Esq. [email protected] Plaintiff: Elizabeth May Pyle, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Lisa C Goodheart, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Jesse D Schomer, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: A. Wingerter, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Johanna W Schneider, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Donna Ackermann Mizrahi, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kevin S Freytag, Esq. [email protected] Sent On: 03/05/2024 15:33:29 Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Plaintiff: Daniel C Hill, Esq. [email protected] Plaintiff: Elizabeth May Pyle, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Lisa C Goodheart, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Jesse D Schomer, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: A. Wingerter, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Johanna W Schneider, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Donna Ackermann Mizrahi, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kevin S Freytag, Esq. [email protected] Sent On: 03/05/2024 15:33:40
- Scheduled Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Event: Status Conference Date: 04/04/2024 Time: 02:00 PM
- Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Protective Order to Stay Discovery, filed.
- Private Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel, filed.
- Event Resulted: Status Conference scheduled on: 04/04/2024 02:00 PM Has been: Held via video Hon. Kevin T. Smith, Presiding April 4, 2024. Status conference held via videoconference. Attorney Daniel Hill and Attorney Elizabeth Pyle appeared for the plaintiffs. Attorney Jesse Schomer and Attorney Lisa Goodheart appeared for the private defendants. Attorney Kevin Freytag appeared for the municipal defendants. Before the court was the defendants' motion to dismiss, plaintiffs' motion to compel discovery, and defendants' motion for protective order to stay discovery. Regarding the motion to dismiss, Attorney Schomer argued that Count I of the complaint should be dismissed because it was not timely filed and perfected pursuant to G. L. c. 40A, § 17, Count II should be dismissed because it is premature and the plaintiffs did not provide the required prior notice of their claims, and Count III should be dismissed because the easement road will only be used for emergency vehicle access, which is not overburdening as a matter of law, so the plaintiffs failed to state a claim. Attorney Hill argued that Count I should not be dismissed because the plaintiffs were not required to file a new complaint or move to amend the complaint within twenty days under the circumstances, no prejudice has been alleged, and the issue was already litigated in the motion to amend. Attorney Hill also argued that pre-suit notice of Count II was impossible because of the short G. L. c. 40A, § 17 filing period, and the claim is ripe due to the issuance of permits under several cases that he agreed to provide to the court. On Count III, Attorney Hill argued that there is no exception for limited access, and he asserted that this would likely be a summary judgment issue. The court requested supplemental briefing on Count II regarding the ripeness issue and set a deadline of April 18, 2024, for the plaintiffs' brief and April 25, 2024, for any opposition by the defendants. The court took this motion under advisement and will issue a decision in due course. The court then heard argument on the two discovery motions. Attorney Hill argued that discovery should be allowed due to the lengthy pendency of this case and noted that he had served several public records requests on the Town of Milton. Attorney Freytag disputed the nature of these requests, stating that they were ordinary discovery requests with a broad scope, and the plaintiffs should request any public records under the state public records law, under which the town would be entitled to reimbursement for the costs associated with finding and producing these records. Following argument, the court allowed each motion in part and denied each motion in part, stating that discovery would be stayed as to Counts I and II until a decision was made on the motion to dismiss, but the Town of Milton and its boards and commissions remain obligated to comply with all proper public records requests made by the plaintiffs. The parties are free to engage immediately in discovery concerning Count III. (Smith, J.).
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.
Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In
