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
Photo of Massachusetts Unified County

Court

Massachusetts Unified County

Massachusetts

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2023-01-12
Status Closed
Type Cot Remove Cloud On Title, G.l. Chapter 240, 6 10
Docket 138 entries
Disposition judgment entered

Parties

Plaintiff Mitri, Jacques E.
Defendant Ferguson Marge, Christina C.|Marge, Michael C.|Griffin, Edward C.|Hugueley, Jennifer|Golden Gates Properties Llc|Nationstar Mortgage Llc|Aurora Loan Services Llc|Homecoming Financial Network Inc|Presidential Mortgage Corporation|Aurora Bank Fsb

Lawyers

Docket Entries

  1. omplaint filed.
  2. ase assigned to the Average Track per Land Court Standing Order 1:04.
  3. and Court miscellaneous filing fee Receipt: 437462 Date: 01/12/2023
  4. and Court surcharge Receipt: 437462 Date: 01/12/2023
  5. and Court summons Receipt: 437462 Date: 01/12/2023
  6. niform Counsel Certificate for Civil Cases filed by Plaintiff.
  7. otion to Appoint Special Process Server Under Rule 4C of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, filed and ALLOWED. Judge: Patterson, Deborah J.
  8. ue Diligence Letter, filed (Death Certificate was not scanned).
  9. ppearance of Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq. for Nationstar Mortgage LLC doing business as Mr. Cooper, filed
  10. he case has been assigned to the A Track. Notice sent. Notice of Judge and Track Assignment was generated and sent to: Defendant: Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq. [email protected] Plaintiff: Jacques E. Mitri 26 Noel Drive PO Box 6575, Holliston, MA 01746 Defendant: Christina C. Ferguson Marge No addresses available Defendant: Michael C. Marge No addresses available Defendant: Edward C. Griffin No addresses available Defendant: Golden State Properties LLC No addresses available Defendant: Aurora Loan Services LLC No addresses available Defendant: Homecoming Financial Network Inc No addresses available Defendant: Presidential Mortgage Corporation No addresses available Sent On: 02/08/2023 12:13:21
  11. vent Scheduled Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Event: Case Management Conference Date: 02/27/2023 Time: 02:00 PM
  12. efendant Nationstar Mortgage Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint and Issue Order Barring Future Filings, filed (by email).
  13. ummons returned to Court with service on Jennifer Hugueley filed. Delivered in hand on February 7, 2023.
  14. efendant Golden Gates Properties, LLC's Motion to Enlarge Time to File a Responsive Pleading to Plaintiff's Complaint, filed (by email).
  15. ppearance of Gary Michael Hogan, Esq., Kimberly K Kroha, Esq., Richard C Ash, Esq. for Christina C. Ferguson Marge, Michael C. Marge, filed
  16. otion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and Motion for Attorney's Fees, filed (by email).
  17. emorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Attorney's Fees, filed (by email).
  18. laintiff's Emergency Motion to Extend Case Management Conference, filed.
  19. efendants' Michael Marge and Christina Marge Letter to the Court Requesting an Extension of Time to File Responsive Pleading, filed.
  20. otion to Extend Case Management Conference, ALLOWED (Smith, J.).
  21. efendant Golden Gates Properties, LLC's Motion to Enlarge Time to File a Responsive Pleading to Plaintiff's Complaint, ALLOWED (Smith, J.).
  22. vent Resulted: Case Management Conference scheduled on: 02/27/2023 02:00 PM Has been: Continued Hon. Kevin T. Smith, Presiding
  23. cheduled Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Event: Motion to Dismiss Date: 04/06/2023 Time: 10:30 AM
  24. ppearance of Gary Michael Hogan, Esq., Kimberly K Kroha, Esq., Richard C Ash, Esq. for Jennifer Hugueley, filed
  25. efendant Hugueley, Motion to Enlarge Time to File Responsive Pleading, filed.
  26. efendant, Hugueley, Motion to Extend Time, ALLOWED (Smith, J.).
  27. otion for a Restraining Order (Fast Track), filed by email.
  28. otice of Docket Entry: This matter is before the court (Roberts, J.), on pro se plaintiff Jacques E. Mitri's Motion For A Restraining Order ("Motion"). The motion is not supported by affidavit or by a verified complaint at all, let alone one showing that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the plaintiff before the adverse party can be heard in opposition. See Mass. R. Civ. P. 65(a). In addition, the court is unable to determine from the Motion what particular actions by whom are sought to be restrained. Accordingly, the request for a temporary restraining order is DENIED. The matter is set down for a preliminary injunction hearing via videoconference with notice to the defendants for March 10, 2023 at 1:30 PM. Email notice to: Pro Se Plaintiff Jacques E. Mitri; Attorney Richard C. Ash; Attorney Kimberly K. Kroha; Attorney Gary M. Hogan; Attorney Robert Tenney; and Attorney Meredith A. Swisher. Judge: Roberts, Hon. Jennifer S.D. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Defendant: Gary Michael Hogan, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kimberly K Kroha, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Richard C Ash, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Robert Tenney, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq. [email protected] Plaintiff: Jacques E. Mitri [email protected] Sent On: 03/03/2023 13:40:33
  29. ummons and Hearing Notice issued on Application for Preliminary Injunction. Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Event: Hearing on Preliminary Injunction Date: 03/10/2023 Time: 01:30 PM
  30. earing Notice issued on Application for Preliminary Injunction. Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Event: Hearing on Preliminary Injunction Date: 03/10/2023 Time: 01:30 PM Email notice to: Pro Se Plaintiff Jacques E. Mitri; Attorney Richard C. Ash; Attorney Kimberly K. Kroha; Attorney Gary M. Hogan; Attorney Robert Tenney; and Attorney Meredith A. Swisher.
  31. riginal Summonses Served (fast track), filed.
  32. laintiff's Motion to Include Missing Documents Related to Restraining Order About Fraud on the Framingham District Court, filed (by email).
  33. laintiff's Motion for Harassment Prevention Order Against Mr. Brendan Ferguson, filed (by email).
  34. efendant, Golden Gates Properties LLC's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint and for Order Barring Future Filings, filed (by email).
  35. laintiff's Memorandum in Support of Motion for Restraining Order and Motion for Harassment Prevention Order, filed (by email).
  36. ppearance of David W Merritt, Esq. for Nationstar Mortgage LLC doing business as Mr. Cooper, filed
  37. vent Resulted: Hearing on Preliminary Injunction scheduled on: 03/10/2023 01:30 PM Has been: Canceled Hon. Kevin T. Smith, Presiding
  38. mergency Ex Parte Motion for Approval of Memorandum of Lis Pendens (fast track), filed.
  39. laintiff's Motion Clarifying and Opposing Alleged Claims of Defendant's Christina C. Ferguson Marge and Michael C. Marge (Fast Track)., filed.
  40. otice of Lis Pendens (Fast Track), filed.
  41. emorandum in Support of Notice of Lis Pendens (fast track), filed.
  42. mergency Ex Parte Motion for Injunctive Relief (fast track), filed.
  43. mergency Ex Parte Motion for Stay Away Order (fast track), filed.
  44. mergency Motion in Reply to Defendants: Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Complaint. (fast track), filed (by email).
  45. ummons returned to Court with service on Nationstar Mortgage LLC doing business as Mr. Cooper filed. Delivered in hand to Lydia Ferrer, agent and person in charge on January 20, 2023.
  46. otice of Docket Entry: The court will conduct a hearing on the Plaintiff's several motions on March 24, 2023 at 10:30, by zoom. In the event that the plaintiff is unavailable for a hearing on this date and time, his motions will be heard on April 6, at 10:30 along with the hearing on the Defendants' motions to dismiss. According to the court's docket, the Plaintiff's open motions which will be heard on March 24 are as follows: Motion for a Restraining Order (Fast Track), Plaintiff's Motion to Include Missing Documents Related to Restraining Order About Fraud on the Framingham District Court, Plaintiff's Motion for Harassment Prevention Order Against Mr. Brendan Ferguson, Emergency Ex Parte Motion for Approval of Memorandum of Lis Pendens, Emergency Ex Parte Motion for Injunctive Relief, Emergency Ex Parte Motion for Stay Away Order, Emergency Motion in Reply to Defendants: Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Complaint. (Smith, J). Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Defendant: Gary Michael Hogan, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kimberly K Kroha, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Richard C Ash, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Robert Tenney, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: David W Merritt, Esq. [email protected] Plaintiff: Jacques E. Mitri [email protected] Defendant: Homecoming Financial Network Inc No addresses available Defendant: Presidential Mortgage Corporation No addresses available Sent On: 03/21/2023 13:22:25
  47. cheduled Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Event: Motion Date: 03/24/2023 Time: 10:30 AM
  48. mergency Motion for a Case Management Conference Hearing (Fast Track), filed.
  49. vent Resulted: Motion scheduled on: 03/24/2023 10:30 AM Has been: Held via video Hon. Kevin T. Smith, Presiding March 24, 2023. Motion hearing held via videoconference. Attorney Richard Ash appeared for defendants Christina Ferguson Marge, Michael Marge, and Jennifer Hugueley. Attorney Robert Tenney appeared for defendant Golden State Properties, LLC. Attorney Meredith Swisher appeared for defendant Nationstar Mortgage, LLC. Before the court was plaintiff's emergency motion in reply to defendants' motions to dismiss. Regarding that motion, the court informed the plaintiff that he has the right to file any papers or arguments he would like to file in response to the defendants' respective motions to dismiss. The court previously scheduled a hearing for April 6, 2023 at 10:30am on the motions to dismiss which have been filed by each of the defendants. The court informed the plaintiff that he should file any written opposition to any of the motions to dismiss at least one day before the hearing on April 6, 2023. The plaintiff has filed various other motions, including a motion for a restraining order and a motion for harassment prevention order. The court declined to rule on any other motions at this time. The court will address the jurisdiction and merits of the plaintiff's other motions at the hearing on April 6, 2023. Following discussion between the court and the plaintiff, the court asked counsel whether all named defendants are represented in this matter. Counsel for the defendants indicated that all defendants are represented except for Edward C. Griffin, who is deceased, and Aurora Loan Services, LLC, Homecoming Financial Network, Inc., and Presidential Mortgage Corporation. All three of these latter defendants are no longer in existence and as a result have not been effectively served. Following colloquy, the court confirmed that all motions to dismiss will be heard on April 6, 2023 at 10:30am. (Smith, J.).
  50. laintiffs' Motion to Dismiss for Non Standing and No Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Against all Defendants Motions, After the 01/11/2012 "Genworth Financial" Plaintiffs' Mortgage Insurance Settlement, For the Unlawful Foreclosure by Aurora Loan Services LLC., filed.
  51. laintiff's Motion to the Defendant Counsel, "Meredith A. Swisher", Previously of Aurora Loan Services LLC to Declare Their Location to be Served With the Summons, filed (by email).
  52. laintiff's Motion for the Production of the "Wet Note", filed (by email).
  53. vent Resulted: Motion to Dismiss scheduled on: 04/06/2023 10:30 AM Has been: Held via video Hon. Kevin T. Smith, Presiding April 6, 2023. Motion hearing held via videoconference. Attorney Richard Ash appeared for defendant Jennifer Hugueley; Attorney Meredith Swisher appeared for defendant Nationstar Mortgage, LLC; Attorney Robert Tenney appeared for defendant Golden State Properties, LLC; Attorney Gary Hogan appeared for defendants Christina and Michael Marge. Plaintiff Jacques Mitri appeared, pro se. No other party appeared. Before the court were motions to dismiss filed by Nationstar Mortgage, Golden State Properties, and defendants Marges and Hugueley, as well as various motions filed by the plaintiff. Before argument, plaintiff Mitri requested a continuance of this hearing for the purpose of retaining counsel. Over the objection of the defendants, the court continued the hearing until May 5, 2023 at 9:30am. There shall be no more continuances of this hearing. In the meantime, no party shall file any more pleadings without first seeking permission from the court, with one exception. If Jacques Mitri retains counsel as he represented he would do, counsel for Mr. Mitri is permitted to file a written opposition to the defendants' motions to dismiss with prior authorization from the court. (Smith, J.).
  54. cheduled Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Event: Motion Date: 05/05/2023 Time: 09:30 AM
  55. vent Resulted: Motion scheduled on: 05/05/2023 09:30 AM Has been: Held via video Hon. Kevin T. Smith, Presiding May 5, 2023. Motion hearing held via videoconference. Attorney Meredith Swisher appeared for defendant Nationstar Mortgage. Attorney Gary Hogan appeared for defendants Christina Ferguson Marge, Michael Marge, and Jennifer Hugueley. Plaintiff Jacques Mitri appeared, pro se. The court stated for the record that Attorney Tenney, who represents defendant Golden Gates Properties, was unable to attend the hearing due to a death in his family but had notified the court of his desire to waive his client's right to a hearing and rest on the papers. Before the court were defendant Golden Gates Properties' motion to dismiss, defendant Nationstar Mortgage's motion to dismiss, defendants Marge, Marge, and Hugueley's motion to dismiss, and various emergency motions filed by the plaintiff. Attorney Swisher argued that this case is barred by collateral estoppel because a final judgment has already been issued on the same action by federal court. Attorney Hogan argued that in addition to collateral estoppel, the plaintiff's complaint does not state a claim of affirmative relief against his clients. The plaintiff argued that this is a case of unlawful foreclosure by the government, and that although the matter has been decided by a federal court, the plaintiff argues that the Land Court is the appropriate court to make the decision. Following discussion, the court took the matter under advisement. A decision will issue in due course, at which time the court will schedule a case management conference if appropriate. (Smith, J.).
  56. ecision entered. (Copies emailed to Gary Michael Hogan, Esq., Kimberly K Kroha, Esq., Richard C Ash, Esq., Robert Tenney, Esq., Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq., David W Merritt, Esq. and Jacques E. Mitri) Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T.
  57. inal Judgment entered. (Copies emailed to Gary Michael Hogan, Esq., Kimberly K Kroha, Esq., Richard C Ash, Esq., Robert Tenney, Esq., Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq., David W Merritt, Esq. and Jacques E. Mitri) Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T.
  58. laintiff's Motion to Stay Judgment, filed.
  59. otion for Reconsideration and Deed the Property back to Jacques E. Mitri (Fast Track), filed.
  60. otice of Appeal by Jacques E. Mitri to the Appeals Court filed.
  61. otice of Service of Notice of Appeal sent to Gary Michael Hogan, Esq., Robert Tenney, Esq., David W Merritt, Esq.
  62. otion to Assemble Record for Appeal, filed.
  63. otice of Service of Notice of Appeal sent to Richard C Ash, Esq., Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq., Kimberly K Kroha, Esq.
  64. cheduled Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Event: Plaintiff's Motion to Stay Judgment and Motion for Reconsideration and Deed the Property back to Jacques E. Mitri Date: 09/19/2023 Time: 09:30 AM
  65. ranscript of Hearing held on May 5, 2023 has been received by the Court.
  66. vent Resulted: Motion scheduled on: 09/19/2023 09:30 AM Has been: Rescheduled Hon. Kevin T. Smith, Presiding
  67. cheduled Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Event: Plaintiff's Motion to Stay Judgment and Motion for Reconsideration and Deed the Property back to Jacques E. Mitri Date: 09/27/2023 Time: 03:30 PM
  68. laintiff's Supplementing the Records for the Hearing on 9/27/2023 (Fast Track), filed.
  69. otion for Court Approval to File Amendment for the Verified Complaint (Fast Track), filed.
  70. vent Resulted: Motion scheduled on: 09/27/2023 03:30 PM Has been: Held via video Hon. Kevin T. Smith, Presiding
  71. eptember 27, 2023. Hearing Status conference held via videoconference. Plaintiff, Jacques E. Mitri appeared pro se. Attorney Robert Tenney appeared for Golden Gate Properties, LLC, Attorney Richard Ash appeared for Jennifer Hugueley, and Christina and Michael Marge, and Attorney David Merritt appeared for Nationstar Mortgage. At the request of Mr. Mitri, Moussa Abboud, a Lebanese interpreter, was present to assist Mr. Mitri during the hearing. The court swore in Mr. Abboud as the Lebanese interpreter. Before the court were three motions filed by Mr. Mitri: (1) Motion for Reconsideration and Deed the Property Back to Jacques E. Mitri; (2) Motion Supplementing the Records for the Hearing on September 27, 2023; and (3) Motion for Court Approval to File Amendment for the Verified Complaint. The court heard argument from Mr. Mitri in support of his motions. The defendants orally opposed all of the Plaintiff's motions. Following colloquy, the court took the motions under advisement. After consideration of Mr. Mitri's motions and his arguments made at the hearing, I make the following rulings. Mr. Mitri's Motion for Reconsideration of this court's decision to dismiss his complaint is DENIED. Mr. Mitri did not present any new evidence or new law that might provide a basis for the court to reconsider the decision to dismiss his complaint dated July 18, 2023. Because I reviewed and considered the records submitted by Mr. Mitri on September 25, 2023, his Motion Supplementing the Records for the Hearing on September 27, 2023 is ALLOWED. Finally, Mr. Mitri's Motion for Court Approval to File Amendment for the Verified Complaint is DENIED. Not only is that motion not timely, but the substance of the proposed amendment does not raise any new claims against the defendants that were not previously alleged in Mr. Mitri's original verified complaint. Thus, allowing the proposed amendment would also be futile. (Smith, J.) Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Defendant: Gary Michael Hogan, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kimberly K Kroha, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Richard C Ash, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Robert Tenney, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: David W Merritt, Esq. [email protected] Plaintiff: Jacques E. Mitri [email protected] Sent On: 09/28/2023 11:38:43
  72. laintiff's Motion to Stay Judgment, filed.
  73. ffidavit of Jacques E. Mitri, filed.
  74. otice of Assembly of Record on Appeal sent to the Clerk of the Appeals Court.
  75. otice of Assembly of Record on Appeal sent to all counsel of record.
  76. otion for Sanctions, Motion for Reconsideration & Motion to Open Case Management. Deed the Property Back to Jacques E. Mitri (Fast Track), filed.
  77. ffidavit of Jacques E. Mitri, filed.
  78. otion to Assemble Record for an appeal, filed.
  79. ffidavit of Jacques E. Mitri , filed.
  80. otice of an Appeal to the 5/5/2023 & 9/27/2023 Complaint Oral Arguments Court Judgment, filed.
  81. ffidavit of Jacques E. Mitri, filed.
  82. ase entered in the Appeals Court as Case No. 2023-P-1236.
  83. otion to Void Judgment Due to The Fraud on The Court. Deed The Property Back to Jacques E. Mitri. (Fast Track), filed.
  84. ffidavit of Jacques E. Mitri, filed.
  85. laintiff's Rule 60(B) Motion for Relief from Judgment Deed The Property Back to Jacques E. Mitri. (Fast Track), filed.
  86. ffidavit of Jacques E. Mitri, filed.
  87. pposition to Plaintiff's Rule 60(B) Motion Motion For Order Regarding Future Filings and Motion for Attorney Fees, filed.
  88. laintiff's Motion for A Hearing for Rule 60(B) Motion, Opposition to the Defendant 03/12/2024 Motions Due to the Fraud on The Court, Sanctions on Defendant's Counsels. Deed the Property Back to the Plaintiff. (Fast Track), filed.
  89. ffidavit of Jacques E. Mitri, filed.
  90. cheduled Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Event: Motion Date: 05/01/2024 Time: 09:30 AM
  91. opy of Notice of Docket entry from the Appeals Court: ORDER: (RE#11 - #15) A review of the motions to stay and the current trial court docket shows that the motions currently pending in the Land Court were filed after entry of the appeal in this court and without leave of this court. In the future, appellant is not to file any motions in the Land Court seeking any form of relief from or change to its judgment without leave of this court. The Land Court is given leave to consider the pending motions. The appellant may prosecute the pending motions, but, for the reasons detailed in the two oppositions, appellant's requests to stay appellate proceedings are denied. The due date for the appellant to re-file his motion to file a non-conforming informal brief and appendix with the proposed informal brief and appendix is enlarged to 4/9/24. See 2/26/24 order RE##10&11. No further enlargements should be anticipated. Appellees' motion to dismiss the appeal (#13), is denied. If the appellant does not re-file his motion to file a non-conforming informal brief and appendix with the proposed informal brief and appendix on or before 4/9/24, the notice of intent to dismiss the appeal pursuant to M.A.C. 19.0(a)(2) shall issue forthwith. Appellees' request for attorney's fees is denied without prejudice to renewal in their brief(s). All other requests for relief are denied. (Sacks, J.) Notice/attest/Smith, J.
  92. opy of Notice of Docket entry from the Appeals Court: RE#16: Appellant is given leave to file a memorandum in the Land Court supporting his pending Rule 60(b) motion. The order issued on 4/2/24 in this court stands. *Notice/attest
  93. opy of Notice of Docket entry from the Appeals Court: ORDER: To the extent any designated appellee does not intend to file a brief, they are requested to alert the court they do not intend to file a brief on or before 5/20/24.
  94. opy of Notice of Docket entry from the Appeals Court: RE#19: Allowed. Appellant's informal brief and appendix are accepted for filing. However, this order should not be construed as a waiver of the requirements, including when filing an Informal Brief, to provide appropriate appellate argument and a record appendix sufficient to enable appellate review. Any appellee brief is now due on or before 5/20/24. (Sacks, J.) *Notice.
  95. ppearance of Kim Aliprantis, Esq. for Golden Gates Properties LLC, filed
  96. laintiff's Memorandum in Favor of His Rule 60(B) Motion for Relief from Judgment, and Deed the Property back to the Plaintiff, filed.
  97. vent Resulted: Motion scheduled on: 05/01/2024 09:30 AM Has been: Held via video Hon. Kevin T. Smith, Presiding May 1, 2024. Motion hearing held via videoconference. Attorney Richard Ash appeared for defendants Jennifer Hugueley, Christina Ferguson Marge, Edward Griffin, and Michael C. Marge. Attorney Meredith Swisher appeared for defendant Nationstar Mortgage, LLC. Attorney Kim Aliprantis appeared for defendant Golden State Properties, LLC. Plaintiff Jacques Mitri appeared, pro se. Before the court was the plaintiff's motion for relief from the judgment. Mitri argued that Attorney Swisher improperly filed an appearance prior to being served with the summons and complaint, which he argued constituted fraud on the court and justifies vacating the judgment in this case. Attorney Swisher argued that Mitri's allegations are false as a factual matter as indicated by the certificate of service in the Verified Complaint and, regardless, do not rise to the level of fraud on the court. Attorney Ash and Attorney Aliprantis joined Attorney Swisher's arguments. Following argument, the court took the motion under advisement and will issue a decision in due course. (Smith, J.).
  98. otice of Docket Entry: Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Defendant: Gary Michael Hogan, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kimberly K Kroha, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Richard C Ash, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Robert Tenney, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kim Aliprantis, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: David W Merritt, Esq. [email protected] Plaintiff: Jacques E. Mitri [email protected] Sent On: 05/01/2024 16:25:49 Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Defendant: Gary Michael Hogan, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kimberly K Kroha, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Richard C Ash, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Robert Tenney, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kim Aliprantis, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: David W Merritt, Esq. [email protected] Plaintiff: Jacques E. Mitri [email protected] Sent On: 05/01/2024 16:26:21
  99. ay 2, 2024: The court has reviewed the Plaintiff's Motion for Relief From Judgment Under Rule 60(b) and the exhibits submitted in support thereof, and considered the oral arguments of the Plaintiff made at the hearing of May 1, 2024. Massachusetts Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) permits the court to relieve a party from a final judgment for reasons that include in subsection (3) fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party. Here, the Plaintiff argues that counsel for each Defendant committed fraud on the court based on the chronology concerning the date on which each Defendant was served with the summons and complaint, and the date each lawyer entered his or her appearance as counsel of record. He contends that some or all of the lawyers entered their appearances on dates that preceded the dates on which their respective clients were served with process. Thus, he argues that the lawyers committed fraud on the court and the final judgment entered on July 18, 2023 should be declared void. The court is not persuaded that the chronologies recounted by the Plaintiff are accurate, but, even if they are, the action of a lawyer entering his or her appearance as counsel of record prior to actual service of process on the party-defendant is not fraud on the court for purposes of the court declaring void or otherwise modifying a judgment under Mass. R. Civ. P. 60(b). The Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Defendant: Gary Michael Hogan, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kimberly K Kroha, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Richard C Ash, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Robert Tenney, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kim Aliprantis, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: David W Merritt, Esq. [email protected] Plaintiff: Jacques E. Mitri [email protected] Sent On: 05/02/2024 13:36:48
  100. otion to Stay Judgment for "The Plaintiff's Motion for Relief From Judgement Under Rule 60(B) and Deed the Property Back to the Plaintiff" (Fast Track), filed.
  101. laintiff's Motion to Review & Reverse the 05/02/2024 Judgment, under Rule 60(b) and deed his property back to the Plaintiff (Fast Track), filed.
  102. otice of an Appeal (Fast Track), filed.
  103. opy of Notice of Docket entry from the Appeals Court with respect to the Motion to add missing documents to record appendix filed by Jacques E. Mitri. (Paper #21): RE#21: Denied without prejudice to renewal with proposed volume II of appendix containing the missing documents. Alternatively, the appellant may file a replacement appendix on or before 6/7/24 to replace the appendix previously filed on 4/12/24 (P#18). *Notice.
  104. laintiff's Motion to Assemble Record for the Notice of an Appeal to the 05/02/2024 Judgement. (Fast Track), filed.
  105. opy of Notice of Docket entry from the Appeals Court with respect to the MOTION of Appellee to extend brief due date filed for Christina C. Ferguson Marge, Jennifer Hugueley, Michael C. Marge and Edward C. Griffin by Attorney Kimberly K. Kroha. (Paper #22): RE#22: See action on paper #23. Notice sent.
  106. opy of Notice of Docket Entry from the Appeals Court with respect to the Updated MOTION of Appellee to extend brief due date filed for Christina C. Ferguson Marge, Jennifer Hugueley, Michael C. Marge and Nationstar Mortgage LLC doing business as Mr. Cooper by Attorney Kimberly K. Kroha. (Paper #23): RE#23: Allowed to 06/28/2024. Notice sent.
  107. opy of Notice of Docket Entry from the Appeals Court with respect to the Appellant's serve clarification filed by Jacques E. Mitri. (Paper #24) RE#24: Noted. *Notice.
  108. otice of Assembly of Record on Appeal sent to the Clerk of the Appeals Court.
  109. otice of Assembly of Record on Appeal sent to all counsel of record.
  110. opy of Notice of Docket Entry from the Appeals Court with respect to the Notice of an Appeal to judgment filed by Jacques E. Mitri. (Paper #25): RE#25: It is noted that the plaintiff has filed a notice of appeal in the Land Court from the order denying his motion for relief from the judgment on appeal in this case. On or before 06/20/2024, the plaintiff shall notify this court, in writing, whether he intends to seek consolidation of that appeal with the appeal now pending in 23-P-1126. *Notice.
  111. ase entered in the Appeals Court as Case No. 2024-P-0702.
  112. opy of Notice of Docket Entry from the Appeals Court: ORDER: The appeals in 23-P-1236 and 24-P-702 are hereby consolidated. The appeal in 24-P-702 is closed. all filings in the consolidated appeal should be continued to be made in 23-P-1236. Accordingly, this matter is closed. Notice/attest
  113. opy of Notice of Docket Entry from the Appeals Court: RE #32: The appeals in 23-P-1236 and 24-P-702 are hereby consolidated. The appeal in 24-P-702 is closed. all filings in the consolidated appeal should be continued to be made in 23-P-1236. As appellant's brief and record appendix have been accepted for filing, appellee's brief is due on or before 7/29/24. To the extent appellees seek leave to proceed in the Land Court with a request for an appeal bond, such leave is granted for both the filing and consideration of the motion by the Land Court. However, this appeal is to proceed. Notice/attest
  114. opy of Notice of Docket Entry from the Appeals Court: RE#35: To the extent the appellant seeks leave to file a response to the appellees' request for an appeal bond, the request is denied without prejudice to renewal in the Land Court. As stated in the 6/27/24 order on #32, however, this appeal is to proceed. All other requests for leave are referred to the panel designated to decide this appeal. Notice/attest
  115. otion under Fraud on the Court, filed.
  116. laintiff's Request for Production of Documents, filed.
  117. otion to Vacate Judgment filed. (Motion to Vacate the Judgment to Dismiss the Plaintiff's Complaint, where the Defendants Commit Fraud on the Court, Misrepresentation, Misconduct, in Violation of Rule 4C, Violation of Mass. R. Civ. P. 60(b), and Deed the Property back to Jacques E. Mitri, filed.)
  118. laintiff's Rule 60(b) Motion for Relief from Judgment, with Supporting Documents, and Request for a Hearing (Fast Track), filed.
  119. laintiff Jacques E. Mitri Motion to Vacate Judgment filed. (Plaintiff's Rule 60(b) Motion for Relief from Judgment, where the Defendants Commit Fraud on the Court, Misrepresentation, Misconduct, in Violation of Rule 4C, in Violation of Mass. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b). Request Emergency Hearing, and Deed the Property to Jacques E. Mitri (Fast Track), filed).
  120. ctober 2, 2024. The court has considered the two motions filed by the Plaintiff on September 30, 2024. One is titled "Plaintiff's Rule 60(b) Motion for Relief from Judgment;" the second is titled "Plaintiff's Rule 60(b) Motion for Relief from Judgment Where the Defendants Commit Fraud on the Court, Misrepresentation, Misconduct, in Violation of Rule 4C, in Violation of Mass. R. Civ. P. 60(b)." The judgment to which the motions refer is the final judgment entered by this court on July 18, 2023 dismissing the Plaintiff's verified complaint. The court notes that the Plaintiff filed substantially the same motion on August 7, 2024 without permission of the Massachusetts Appeals Court where an appeal of the final judgment issued by this court is pending. In substance, all three motions seek the same relief based on the same alleged infractions committed by the Defendants. The motions are also substantially the same as the motion filed by the Plaintiff on March 8, 2024, which the court denied on May 1, 2024 after a hearing. The current motions assert that the Defendants, through counsel, committed fraud on the court by not complying with Rule 4 and failing to file a responsive pleading within 20 days of service of the Plaintiff's verified complaint. The motions also assert that the Defendants and their counsel made misleading statements in their respective motions to dismiss in an effort to defraud the court with the result being that the court wrongfully dismissed the Plaintiff's verified complaint. In none of the motions has the Plaintiff identified any new or different evidence that might support a claim of fraud or misconduct by the Defendants, nor has he made a new legal argument that would justify the relief requested. Therefore, on the merits, the Plaintiff has not demonstrated his entitlement to an order voiding this court's decision of July 18, 2023. In addition, Rule 60(b)(3) requires that a motion seeking relief for fraud, misrepresentation or other misconduct must be filed "not more than one year after the judgment, order or proceeding was entered or taken." In this case, the Plaintiff's most recent motions were filed more than one year after the final judgment from which the Plaintiff seeks relief. Thus, they are untimely. For these reasons, the Plaintiff's (i) Rule 60(b) Motion for Relief from Judgment and (ii) Rule 60(b) Motion for Relief from Judgment Where the Defendants Commit Fraud on the Court, Misrepresentation, Misconduct, in Violation of Rule 4C, in Violation of Mass. R. Civ. P. 60(b). are DENIED. The motion filed by the Plaintiff on August 7, 2024 is also DENIED. The court further orders that the Plaintiff is prohibited from filing any more pleadings, motions or other papers in this action without seeking the court's permission through a motion that demonstrates good cause to allow the filing of such additional pleadings, motions or other papers. Pleadings, motions or other papers filed without the permission of this court will not be accepted for docketing. (Smith, J.). Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Defendant: Gary Michael Hogan, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kimberly K Kroha, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Richard C Ash, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Robert Tenney, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kim Aliprantis, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: David W Merritt, Esq. [email protected] Plaintiff: Jacques E. Mitri [email protected] Sent On: 10/02/2024 09:15:31 Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Defendant: Gary Michael Hogan, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kimberly K Kroha, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Richard C Ash, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Robert Tenney, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kim Aliprantis, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: David W Merritt, Esq. [email protected] Plaintiff: Jacques E. Mitri [email protected] Sent On: 10/02/2024 09:16:04
  121. otice of Motion: Appellant Motion for Extension of Time for Reply Brief, filed.
  122. otion for Leave to File a Notice of Appeal, filed. (Plaintiff Notice of Appeal to the 10/02/2024 Docket Entry (Fast Track))
  123. ctober 18, 2024. The court has reviewed the several motions filed by the Plaintiff seeking leave to file new motions in this case in the Land Court. To the extent necessary, the Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a notice of appeal is ALLOWED. The notice of appeal should be filed and accepted by the Recorder's Office. The motions filed on October 3, 2024 and October 8, 2024, both of which seek leave to file another Motion for Relief from Judgment under Mass. R. Civ. P. 60(b), are DENIED as the Plaintiff has not demonstrated good cause to allow another motion challenging this court's judgment dated July 18, 2023 that dismissed his complaint. (Smith, J.). Judge: Smith, Hon. Kevin T. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Defendant: Gary Michael Hogan, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kimberly K Kroha, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Richard C Ash, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Robert Tenney, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Kim Aliprantis, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq. [email protected] Defendant: David W Merritt, Esq. [email protected] Plaintiff: Jacques E. Mitri [email protected] Sent On: 10/18/2024 14:30:03
  124. opy of Notice of Docket entry from the Appeals Court: Please take note that, with respect to the Status Report filed by Jacques E. Mitri. (Paper #57), on November 8, 2024, the following entry was made on the docket: RE#57 The appellant's latest status report is one of many filings relating to Rule 60(b) motions that he has sought to file in the Land Court. The appellant's previous filings referencing Rule 60(b) motions in the Land Court, and for permission to file a reply brief, were denied on 10/11/24, 10/21/24, and 10/31/24 (Desmond, J.). In addition, a review of the Land Court docket reveals that the appellant is prohibited from filing any additional papers there without seeking the court's permission by way of motion demonstrating good cause. Most recently, on 10/18/24, the Land Court (Smith, J.) denied the appellant permission to file additional Rule 60(b) motions. Now, in this latest status report, the appellant asserts that he filed another Rule 60(b) motion in the Land Court on 11/5/24, but this motion is not on the Land Court docket. The court notes that this appeal has been fully briefed and is in ready status. It will proceed to panel consideration in due course. The appellant is hereby cautioned that any further filings relating to Rule 60(b) motions in the Land Court may result in action by this court, including possibly the restriction of future filings. (Massing, J.) *Notice/attest/Smith, J.
  125. otice of Appeal by Jacques E. Mitri to the Appeals Court filed.
  126. otice of Service of Notice of Appeal sent to Richard C Ash, Esq., Meredith Ann Swisher, Esq., Robert Tenney, Esq.
  127. ORRECTION: Due to clerical error, the following correction was made to the docket on January 27, 2025: The corrected language is "(04/30/2024) Appearance of Kim Aliprantis, Esq. for Golden Gates Properties LLC, filed" and the following original text is stricken: "(04/30/2024) Appearance of Kim Aliprantis, Esq. for Golden State Properties LLC, filed."
  128. ORRECTION: Due to clerical error, the following correction was made to the docket on January 27, 2025: The corrected language is "Plaintiff's Memorandum in Favor of His Rule 60(B) Motion for Relief from Judgment, and Deed the Property back to the Plaintiff" and the following original text is stricken: "Memorandum in Support of Preliminary Injunction, filed.." (Entry dated 04/30/2024)
  129. ORRECTION: Due to clerical error, the following correction was made to the docket on January 28, 2025: The corrected language is "Motion under Fraud on the Court, filed." and the following original text is stricken: "Motion, filed.." (Entry dated 07/23/2024)
  130. otice of Assembly of Record on Appeal sent to the Clerk of the Appeals Court.
  131. otice of Assembly of Record on Appeal sent to all counsel of record.
  132. ase entered in the Appeals Court as Case No. 2025-P-0193.
  133. ithdrawal of Kimberly K Kroha, Esq. for Christina C. Ferguson Marge, Michael C. Marge, filed
  134. ithdrawal of Richard C Ash, Esq. for Christina C. Ferguson Marge, Michael C. Marge, filed
  135. ithdrawal of Richard C Ash, Esq. for Christina C. Ferguson Marge, Michael C. Marge, Jennifer Hugueley, filed
  136. ithdrawal of Kimberly K Kroha, Esq. for Christina C. Ferguson Marge, Michael C. Marge, Jennifer Hugueley, filed
  137. opy of Notice of Docket entry from the Appeals Court: "MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Following our decision dated April 16, 2025, the appellees, Christina, C. Ferguson Marge, Michael C. Marge and Jennifer Hugueley, submitted an application for an award of appellate attorney's fees from the appellant, Jacques E. Mitri, in the amount of $12,260.00.[1] In support of their application, the appellees submitted the affidavit of their attorney, Gary M. Hogan. Attached to Hogan's affidavit are copies of an invoice detailing his billing hours in connection with this matter. In essence, the invoices describe the hourly rate, actions taken, and time spent on the appeal. "While the amount of a reasonable attorney's fee is largely discretionary, a judge should consider the nature of the case and the issues presented, the time and labor required, the amount of damages involved, the result obtained, the experience, reputation, and ability of the attorney, the usual price charged for similar services by other attorneys in the same area, and the amount of awards in similar cases. No one factor is determinative, and a factor-by-factor analysis, although helpful, is not required" (citations and quotations omitted). Twin Fires Inv., LLC v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., 445 Mass. 411, 429-430 (2005). In making such a determination, we "properly exercise[] independent judgment concerning the request's reasonableness." Stowe v. Bologna, 417 Mass. 199, 204 (1994). The assessment of fees based on the "lodestar" method, which involves "multiplying the number of hours reasonably spent on the case times a reasonable hourly rate," is permissible. See Fontaine v. Ebtec Corp., 415 Mass. 309, 324 (1993). We are not obliged to "review and allow or disallow each individual item in the bill, but [may] consider the bill as a whole." Berman v. Linnane, 434 Mass. 301, 303 (2001). We have reviewed the application and considered the factors set forth in Twin Fires and in Linthicum v. Archambault, 379 Mass. 381, 388-389 (1979). In addition, we have considered the appellant's response to the appellees' application. Based on all of the requisite factors, we find as follows: Attorney Hogan's $275 hourly rate and $250 hourly associate rate, the time spent on the appeal, and the total fees requested are reasonable in the context of this case. See Linnane, 434 Mass. 301, 303. Accordingly, the appellees are awarded attorney's fees in the amount of $12,260.00. Any proceedings to enforce this award shall be commenced in the Land Court. So ordered. By the Court (Neyman, Shin & Wood, JJ.[2]) *Notice/Attest _________________________________________________________ [1] In our decision, we noted that "the [appellant's] appellate brief does not show, or even argue, that the judge erred by dismissing the claims against Hugueley and the Marges on [the] basis [of issue preclusion and claim preclusion]. For these reasons, the [appellant's] appeal of the dismissal of his claims against [Hugueley and the Marges] is frivolous. Hugueley and the Marges may file a verified and itemized application for such fees and costs within fourteen days of the date of this decision, and Mitri will have fourteen days thereafter in which to file any opposition to the amounts requested. See Fabre v. Walton, 441 Mass. 9, 10-11 (2004)." [2] The panelists are listed in order of seniority."
  138. laintiff's Motion for Court Approval to File Response Copy of the Docket Entry for the Appeals Court, filed.

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.

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

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