Motion-Secondary: Peter Alphas Individually and Derivatively as a minority shareholder of The Alphas Company, Inc., a Massachusetts Corporation vs. John Alphas, aka Yanni Alphas Individually and doing business as The Alphas Company, Inc. et al

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
MIDDLESEX, ss. SUPERIOR COURT
DOCKET NO. 1581CV06815A
PETER ALPHAS,
Plaintiff, INTHE SEP or THE
“aus con THEEN Oh SPnbU Sex
v. DEC 3°60 2019
JOHN ALPHAS, ef al, Ke 29 Ohad)
CLERK

 

 

Defendants

 

-MORANDM IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION

 

TO BIFURCATE TRIAL

NOW COMES the Plaintiff and requests that the Court bifurcate the trial in
this action in two parts: (1) the issue of whether the Plaintiff has an ownership

interest in The Alphas Company, Inc. (“TAC”), and (2) all oth

et claims and

counterclaims. In support of this motion, the Plaintiff states as follows.

The gravamen of the Plaintiff's claims is that the Defendants froze him out of
the management of TAC notwithstanding his ownership intetest. The
Defendant, Yanni Alphas, has proffered what he purports to be a transfer of
ownership signed by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff strenuously denies that he
signed this document, and thete is a question of fact as to whether he did.
However, if the finder of fact determines that the Plaintiff does not have any
interest in TAC, then the remainder of the Plaintiff's claims are likely moot

because he will have no intetest in the company to enfotce.

Under Mass. R. Civ. P. 42(b), “The court, in furtherance of convenience or to
avoid prejudice, or when separate trials will be conducive to expedition and
economy, may order a separate trial... of any claim, cross-claim, counterclaim,

or third-party claim, or of any separate issue...” The Plaintiff
the Court bifurcate the trial on the narrow issue of ownership.

requests that

This is a cost-saving measute for both the parties and the Court. The parties

would not have to spend time and money preparing for the tri

al of the

remainder of the claims. Additionally, the Court would not have to prepare for
a longer trial at the outset. Moreover, a finding of ownership might allow theoF

patties to resolve their remaining disputes on theit own without the need for
additional Court intervention.

Whether the Plaintiff transferred his ownership interest is a basic but critical
question that would require only one day of trial and no more than four
witnesses (one of whom is likely out of state and will testify by deposition).!
The remainder of the case will likely span several days and require more
witnesses. The chance of avoiding the introduction of testimony that could be
moot militates towards bifurcation of the issues.

For the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiff requests the stated relief.
Respectfully submitted,

PETER ALPHAS,

by his attorney,

   

Patrick M. Groulx

BBO No. 673394
Isenberg Groulx, LLC

368 W Broadway, Suite 2
Boston, MA 02127

Ph: (857) 880-7889

Fax: (617) 249-1981
E-mail: patrick@i-gllc.com

\ The Plaintiff has discussed with the Defendant the possibility of trying the case jury-waived, which
would further simplify matters. .

2Certificate of Service

On this day, December 6, 2019, I certify that I served or caused to be served a
true and accurate copy of this document on all parties by first class mail and
E-mail.

 

Patrick M.Grouk