On July 31, 2019 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Piszcz, Christine A.,
Piszcz, Jr., Edward,
and
Stanley, David W.,
Stanley, Elia,
for Real Property
in the District Court of Bristol County.
Preview
aH\0.S
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
BRISTOL SS CA No.: 1973CV00704
EDWARD PISZCZ, JR. AND
CHRISTINE A. PISZCZ,
Plaintiffs
Vv. BRISTOL, SS SUPERIOR COURT
FILED.
DAVID W. STANLEY AND
ELIA STANLEY, JAN 30 2020
Defendants
—_— MARC J SANTOS, ESQ.
CLERK/MAGISTRATE
PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO REMOVE THE DEFAULT
Now come the above-named Plaintiffs, Edward Piszcz, Jr. and Christine A. Piszez, who
oppose Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remove the Default which entered on September 17, 2019. It is
well settled that a defendant may obtain relief from a default on a showing of “good cause”.
Bissanti Design/Build Group vs. McClay, 32 Mass.App.Ct. 469, 470 (1992). “Good cause”
requires a showing by affidavit that the defendant had a good reason for failing to plead or
defendant in a timely manner and had meritorious defenses. New England Allbank for Sav. v.
Rouleau, 28 Mass. App. Ct. 135, 140 (1989). Plaintiffs’ submit that good cause was not shown.
Therefore, the issue to be determined by the Court, is whether has there been good reason
shown for failing to plead or defend in a timely manner and that Defendants had meritorious
defenses.
Page 1 of 2
THOMAS J. HALLAL, JR. - ATTORNEY AT LAW + 209 BEDFORD STREET - FALL RIVER, MA 02720Respectfully submitted,
Edward Piszcz, Jr. and Christine A. Piszcz
By their attorney,
BY Mel
homas J, Hallal, Jr., Esefhire
209 Bedford Street, Suite 301
Fall River, MA 02720
(508) 676-1151
BBO#550212
thomashallal@tjh-law.com
January 23, 2020
Page 2 of 2
Document Filed Date
January 30, 2020
Case Filing Date
July 31, 2019
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
aH\0.S COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS BRISTOL SS CA No.: 1973CV00704 EDWARD PISZCZ, JR. AND CHRISTINE A. PISZCZ, Plaintiffs Vv. BRISTOL, SS SUPERIOR COURT FILED. DAVID W. STANLEY AND ELIA STANLEY, JAN 30 2020 Defendants —_— MARC J SANTOS, ESQ. CLERK/MAGISTRATE PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO REMOVE THE DEFAULT Now come the above-named Plaintiffs, Edward Piszcz, Jr. and Christine A. Piszez, who oppose Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remove the Default which entered on September 17, 2019. It is well settled that a defendant may obtain relief from a default on a showing of “good cause”. Bissanti Design/Build Group vs. McClay, 32 Mass.App.Ct. 469, 470 (1992). “Good cause” requires a showing by affidavit that the defendant had a good reason for failing to plead or defendant in a timely manner and had meritorious defenses. New England Allbank for Sav. v. Rouleau, 28 Mass. App. Ct. 135, 140 (1989). Plaintiffs’ submit that good cause was not shown. Therefore, the issue to be determined by the Court, is whether has there been good reason shown for failing to plead or defend in a timely manner and that Defendants had meritorious defenses. Page 1 of 2 THOMAS J. HALLAL, JR. - ATTORNEY AT LAW + 209 BEDFORD STREET - FALL RIVER, MA 02720Respectfully submitted, Edward Piszcz, Jr. and Christine A. Piszcz By their attorney, BY Mel homas J, Hallal, Jr., Esefhire 209 Bedford Street, Suite 301 Fall River, MA 02720 (508) 676-1151 BBO#550212 thomashallal@tjh-law.com January 23, 2020 Page 2 of 2