On December 08, 2016 a
Answer
was filed
involving a dispute between
Harwich Beach, Llc,
and
Coastal Heritage Bank F K A S-Bank,
for Equitable Remedies
in the District Court of Norfolk County.
Preview
\s
ac
rh ai
\9 :
re + 1 \COh 6 INWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
yy
Me
NORFOLK, SS COUNT SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT
GLK OF THE TRIAL COURT
C.A. NO, 1682CV01543
HARWICH BEACH, LLC,
Plaintiff,
Vv.
COASTAL HERITAGE BANK ffk/a
S-BANK,
Defendant.
“ANSWER
NOW COMES the Defendant Coastal Heritage Bank f/k/a S-Bank (hereinafter referred to
as the “Bank”) and hereby answers Plaintiff Harwich Beach, LLC’s (hereinafter referred to as
“Plaintiff’) Complaint as follows:
I Introduction
The Bank denies the allegations and/or characterizations in Plaintiff's “Introduction”.
Il. Parties
Upon information and belief, admitted.
Admitted.
Til. Background Facts
The Bank admits that in November 29, 2010 Plaintiff obtained a Foreclosure Deed for
property known and numbered as 16 Bank Street, Harwich, Massachusetts (hereinafter
teferred to as the “Property”).
The Bank admits that Plaintiff had concerns regarding the effect and enforceability of a
Boundary Line Agreement that was executed by Plaintiff's predecessors in title and its
neighbor. The remaining allegations and/or characterizations contained in paragraph 4 of
the Plaintiff's Compliant are denied.
Prior to the closing, the Bank took the position that it could convey good and marketable
title to the Property according to the terms of the Memorandum of Agreement dated July
23, 2010. The remaining allegations and/or characterizations contained in paragraph 5 of
the Plaintiff's Complaint are denied.
The Bank admits the Parties executed an Indemnification Agreement dated December 21,
2010. The remaining allegations and/or characterizations contained in paragraph 6 of the
Plaintiff's Complaint are denied.
The Bank admits that the Parties entered into an Indemnity Agreement in or about
December 21, 2010. The remaining allegations and/or characterizations contained in
paragraph 7 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are denied.
The Bank states Exhibit A is a document that speaks for itself and no response it
required. To the extent a response is required, it is denied.
9. Upon information and belief, admitted.
10. The Bank admits that it received invoices for legal fees from Plaintiff. The remaining
allegations and/or characterizations contained in paragraph 10 of the Plaintiff's
Complaint are denied.
11. The Bank states Exhibit B is a document which speaks for itself and no response is
needed. To the extent a response is required, it is denied.
12. Denied. The Bank admits that it has paid invoices for legal work performed on Plaintiff's
behalf for the end of 2015 into 2016
13, Exhibit C-is a document which speaks for itself and no response is needed. To the extent
a response is required, it is denied.
14, Exhibit D is a document which speaks for itself and no response is needed. To the extent
a response jis required, itis denied. The remaining llegations and/or characterizations
contained iin paragraph 14 ofthe Plaititit?’s Complaint are denied.
15. The Bank denies it’ has any, further obligations ¢to Plaintiff pursuant to the Indernity
Agreement.
COUNTI I
Declaratory J udgment
(Harwich Beach v. Coastal, Heritage'Bank)
16. The Bank repeats and incorporates herein by reference its answers to paragraphs 1-15
17. Denied.
18. The Indemnification Agreement is a document that speaks for itself and no response is
needed. To the extent a further response is required, the allegations contained in
paragraph 18 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are denied.
19. Denied.
20. Denied
21. Denied.
22, Denied.
COUNT II
Chapter 93A-Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices
(Harwich Beach v. Coastal Heritage Bank)
23, The Bank repeats and incorporates herein by reference its answer to paragraphs 122.
24. Admitted.
25. Denied.
26. Denied.
27, Denied.
COUNT III
Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing
(Harwich Beach v. Coastal Heritage Bank)
28. The Bank repeats and incorporates herein its Answer to paragraphs 1-27.
29. Admitted.
30. Denied.
31. Denied.
32. Denied.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
First Affirmative Defense
The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which the relief can be granted.
Second Affirmative Defense
The Plaintiff's Claims are barred by its own unclean hands,
Third Affirmative Defense
The Plaintiff's Claims are barred because it has not suffered any damages.
at
Foiurth Affirmative Defense
Plaintiff's Claims are barred by reason of waiver.
Fifth Affirmative Defense
Plaintiff's claims are barred by reason of estoppel.
Sixth Affirmative Defense
Plaintiff's Claims are barred by reason of laches.
WHEREFORE, based upon the foregoing, Defendant Coastal Hetiiage Batk Ska S-
Bank requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintif’s Complaint and award Defendant
interest, costs and reasonable attoney’s fees.
Respectfully submitted,
Coastal Heritage Bank f/k/a S-Bank,
:
Defendant,
By its Attorney,
ALISA BOND, ESC.
BBO No. 654266
lisab@bbb-lawfirm.com : -
Baker, Braverman. & Barbadoro, P.C.
300 Crown Colony Drive, Suite 500
Boston, MA 02184
DATED: January 10, 2017 (781) 848-9610
CERTEICATE OF SERVICE
| hereby certify that a true copy of te abeve
document was served upon the ation
record for gach par y malyay
on
Document Filed Date
January 13, 2017
Case Filing Date
December 08, 2016
Category
Equitable Remedies
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
\s ac rh ai \9 : re + 1 \COh 6 INWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS yy Me NORFOLK, SS COUNT SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT GLK OF THE TRIAL COURT C.A. NO, 1682CV01543 HARWICH BEACH, LLC, Plaintiff, Vv. COASTAL HERITAGE BANK ffk/a S-BANK, Defendant. “ANSWER NOW COMES the Defendant Coastal Heritage Bank f/k/a S-Bank (hereinafter referred to as the “Bank”) and hereby answers Plaintiff Harwich Beach, LLC’s (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff’) Complaint as follows: I Introduction The Bank denies the allegations and/or characterizations in Plaintiff's “Introduction”. Il. Parties Upon information and belief, admitted. Admitted. Til. Background Facts The Bank admits that in November 29, 2010 Plaintiff obtained a Foreclosure Deed for property known and numbered as 16 Bank Street, Harwich, Massachusetts (hereinafter teferred to as the “Property”). The Bank admits that Plaintiff had concerns regarding the effect and enforceability of a Boundary Line Agreement that was executed by Plaintiff's predecessors in title and its neighbor. The remaining allegations and/or characterizations contained in paragraph 4 of the Plaintiff's Compliant are denied. Prior to the closing, the Bank took the position that it could convey good and marketable title to the Property according to the terms of the Memorandum of Agreement dated July 23, 2010. The remaining allegations and/or characterizations contained in paragraph 5 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are denied. The Bank admits the Parties executed an Indemnification Agreement dated December 21, 2010. The remaining allegations and/or characterizations contained in paragraph 6 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are denied. The Bank admits that the Parties entered into an Indemnity Agreement in or about December 21, 2010. The remaining allegations and/or characterizations contained in paragraph 7 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are denied. The Bank states Exhibit A is a document that speaks for itself and no response it required. To the extent a response is required, it is denied. 9. Upon information and belief, admitted. 10. The Bank admits that it received invoices for legal fees from Plaintiff. The remaining allegations and/or characterizations contained in paragraph 10 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are denied. 11. The Bank states Exhibit B is a document which speaks for itself and no response is needed. To the extent a response is required, it is denied. 12. Denied. The Bank admits that it has paid invoices for legal work performed on Plaintiff's behalf for the end of 2015 into 2016 13, Exhibit C-is a document which speaks for itself and no response is needed. To the extent a response is required, it is denied. 14, Exhibit D is a document which speaks for itself and no response is needed. To the extent a response jis required, itis denied. The remaining llegations and/or characterizations contained iin paragraph 14 ofthe Plaititit?’s Complaint are denied. 15. The Bank denies it’ has any, further obligations ¢to Plaintiff pursuant to the Indernity Agreement. COUNTI I Declaratory J udgment (Harwich Beach v. Coastal, Heritage'Bank) 16. The Bank repeats and incorporates herein by reference its answers to paragraphs 1-15 17. Denied. 18. The Indemnification Agreement is a document that speaks for itself and no response is needed. To the extent a further response is required, the allegations contained in paragraph 18 of the Plaintiff's Complaint are denied. 19. Denied. 20. Denied 21. Denied. 22, Denied. COUNT II Chapter 93A-Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices (Harwich Beach v. Coastal Heritage Bank) 23, The Bank repeats and incorporates herein by reference its answer to paragraphs 122. 24. Admitted. 25. Denied. 26. Denied. 27, Denied. COUNT III Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing (Harwich Beach v. Coastal Heritage Bank) 28. The Bank repeats and incorporates herein its Answer to paragraphs 1-27. 29. Admitted. 30. Denied. 31. Denied. 32. Denied. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES First Affirmative Defense The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which the relief can be granted. Second Affirmative Defense The Plaintiff's Claims are barred by its own unclean hands, Third Affirmative Defense The Plaintiff's Claims are barred because it has not suffered any damages. at Foiurth Affirmative Defense Plaintiff's Claims are barred by reason of waiver. Fifth Affirmative Defense Plaintiff's claims are barred by reason of estoppel. Sixth Affirmative Defense Plaintiff's Claims are barred by reason of laches. WHEREFORE, based upon the foregoing, Defendant Coastal Hetiiage Batk Ska S- Bank requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintif’s Complaint and award Defendant interest, costs and reasonable attoney’s fees. Respectfully submitted, Coastal Heritage Bank f/k/a S-Bank, : Defendant, By its Attorney, ALISA BOND, ESC. BBO No. 654266 lisab@bbb-lawfirm.com : - Baker, Braverman. & Barbadoro, P.C. 300 Crown Colony Drive, Suite 500 Boston, MA 02184 DATED: January 10, 2017 (781) 848-9610 CERTEICATE OF SERVICE | hereby certify that a true copy of te abeve document was served upon the ation record for gach par y malyay on