arrow left
arrow right
  • BURTON,NANCY v. MASON,DAVID PHILIPM00 - Misc - Injunction document preview
  • BURTON,NANCY v. MASON,DAVID PHILIPM00 - Misc - Injunction document preview
  • BURTON,NANCY v. MASON,DAVID PHILIPM00 - Misc - Injunction document preview
  • BURTON,NANCY v. MASON,DAVID PHILIPM00 - Misc - Injunction document preview
  • BURTON,NANCY v. MASON,DAVID PHILIPM00 - Misc - Injunction document preview
  • BURTON,NANCY v. MASON,DAVID PHILIPM00 - Misc - Injunction document preview
  • BURTON,NANCY v. MASON,DAVID PHILIPM00 - Misc - Injunction document preview
  • BURTON,NANCY v. MASON,DAVID PHILIPM00 - Misc - Injunction document preview
						
                                

Preview

X06-UWY-CV-21-5028294 S NANCY BURTON SUPERIOR COURT V. JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF : WATERBURY DAVID PHILIP MASON ETAL. MARCH 28, 2023 MOTION FOR REARGUMENT Plaintiff moves for reargument of the decision of the trial court (Bellis, J.) granting Defendant Mason’s motion for judgment. The motion is premised upon a non-substantive assertion of facts with no bearing whatsoever on the merits of this case. The motion is premised upon a non-substantive assertion of facts with no bearing whatsoever on the merits of this case as well as a mischaracterization of the facts of this case. This case was commenced after the said defendants Carmody and Gibbons harassed and intimidated Plaintiff with death threats and other serious harm and circulated false, malicious and deliberate statements concerning Plaintiff and her goats, even to the extent of haranguing Superior Court personnel and judges by name in an attempt to influence judicial decisionmaking against Plaintiff. The record is replete with these facts, as well as the conclusion of then-state veterinarian Mary Jane Lis, DVM, to dismiss the complaint by Carmody and others against Plaintiff in 2018, finding each goat individually in good health and well cared for. No valid evidence was ever presented to the contrary. THIS IS A PRACTICE BOOK SECTION 11-11 MOTION. Thus, when the State began its investigation in the fall of 2020, they were aware that Plaintiffs goats were healthy, well cared for and flourishing under the devoted care of Plaintiff. Plaintiff attaches hereto a photograph she took of a group of her goats peacefully grazing on leaves and pasture grasses in a state of contentment at the very moment the state began its investigation. Obviously the state blinded itself to the truth to pursue this harassing case. Yet Defendant Carmody perverted the facts and flooded the community and social and news media with false and ignorant claims that the mere fact that the goats ate maple leaves was proof that they were malnourished and underfed by Plaintiff. The conduct undertaken by Defendant Mason was similarly execrable. It is undisputed that he chased some of the goats into the road deliberately with the use of his airhorn in accordance with a technique that had obviously been shared by Defendants Carmody and Gibbons. He never once communicated to Plaintiff that he had observed any of the goats on his property; he delighted in disparaging and maligning Plaintiff behind her back. He participated in a cruel scheme to remove all the goats from Plaintiff's property on false grounds of their supposed malnutrition when he was aware as anyone that the statement was untrue. See, e.g., the attached photograph Plaintiff took of a group of her goats grazing contentedly on leaves and pasture grasses during the fall of 2020, just as the state had commenced its investigation based on Defendants’ false assertions the goats were underfed and uncared for. The goats lived in a goat paradise and in large part due to Mr. Mason’s conduct they were driven to abuse and misery in the hands of the state. Justice demands that this motion be granted. Plaintiff attaches hereto and incorporates herein a motion for extension of time nunc pro tunc to move for reargument. THE PL ee Nani Bu 147 Cross Highway Redding CT 06896 Tel. 203-313-1510 NancyBurtonCT@aol.com Ee eos L% wv AEay ns a: =o — Pe a co ny ae 1 PS hi J aia es if eS a ne se) ieee ee Wo rece Ane yi a eth. gs Fa ips oe i! bee ie rg Fed ce 3 os os y 10h 4 eS “igs ro Sia yi . i C4 i ae Vane et oi be ys a oi a ha 3 a i 7es eh as ae oI al Ye Pe aaa 1, ca = Les os — a a | es iY Fall 2020 ¥ ed a 2 Cross Hpi ne Pho CERTIFICATION This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing was delivered electronically on March 28, 2023 to all counsel of record as below: Michael D. Riseberg, Esq. Christine N. Parise, Esq. Daniel B. Stanhill, Esq. Rubin and Rudman LLP 53 State Street, 15'" Floor Boston MA 02109 Tel. 617-330-7000 mriseberg@rubinrudman.com parise@ribinrudman.com dstanhill rubinrudman.com Matthew Levine, Esq. Jonathan Harding, Esq. 231 Capitol Ave. Hartford CT 06106 Matthew. Levine@ct.gov Jonathan. Harding@ct.gov James N. Tallberg, Esq. Kimberly A. Bosse, Esq. Karsten & Tallberg, LLC 500 Enterprise Drive Suite 4B Rocky Hill CT 006067 Tel. 860-233-5600 tallberg@kt-lawfirm.com kbosse@kt-lawfirm.com Philip T. Newbury, Jr., Esq. Howd & Ludorf, LLC 65 Wethersfield Ave. Hartford CT 06114-1121 Tel. 860-249-1361 pnewbury@hl-law.com Steven Stafstrom, Esq. Alexander W. Ahrens, Esq Pullman Comley, LLC Melick & Porter, LLP 850 Main Street 900 Main Street South Bridgeport T 06601 Southbury CT 06488 45> SStafstrom@pullcom.com aahrens@melicklaw.com