Preview
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
NORFOLK, SS.
JOHN TASSINARIL, JR.
Plaintiff,
ve
BUILDING ASSOCIATION of the
WM, B, DALTON AMERICAN
LEGION, INC.
Defendant.
SSS
VERIFIED COMPLAINT
PARTIES
SUPERIOR COURT
‘TRIAL COURT DEPT,
Ch No. 1682 CVOISCH
1. The Plaintiff, John Tassinari, Jr., is an individual who at all material times has resided at 68
Blueberry Rd., Abington, Norfolk County, Massachusetts.
2. The Defendant, Building Association of the WM 8. Dalton American Legion, Inc., isa
corporation organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, with a
registered office address of 777 Plymouth Street, Holbrook, Norfolk County, Massachusetts.
FACTS
3. The Defendant is the owner of real property located at 777 Plymouth Street, Holbrook,
Norfolk County, Massachusetts {the Property).
4. Atall times relevant to this Complaint, Paul A. Anastasio, was the President of the
Defendant corporation as indicated in filings with the Secretary of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts and had the authority to contract on behalf of the Defendant; including the
authority to bind the Defendant in regards to the sale of the Property.
We!10.
dq.
12.
13.
The Property was listed for sale on the Multiple Listing Service. Sacha Anastsio of Lamachia
Realty, Inc. was the listing agent.
On or about September 14, 2016, the Plaintiff, through his real estate agent, presented a
written Offer to Purchase the Property in the amount of $400,000.00, which was the price
agreed upon between the parties, The Offer was subject to a mortgage contingency in the
amount of $250,000.00. (Tab A, Offer dated September 14, 2016).
The Offer was rejected by Paul Anastasio, acting on behalf of the Defendant, due to the fact
that it contained a mortgage contingency and he wanted an offer with no mortgage
contingency, a/k/a “a cash deal.”
On or about September 17, 2016, the Plaintiff submitted a new written Offer in the amount
of $400,000.00. In keeping with the response of Mr, Anastasio, the second offer was not
subject to a mortgage contingency (Tab B, Offer dated September 17, 2016).
Upon submitting the second Offer, the Plaintiff ordered a 21E test for the Property per the
terms of the Offer and In reliance on the fact that the parties had a deal.
Thereafter, Mr. Anastasio, acting on behalf of the Defendant, tefused to proceed with the
sale of the Property. }
‘An email received from the listing agent indicated that Mr. Anastasio had agreed to the
$400,000.00 purchase price but was now refusing to go forward with the deai. (Tab C, email
from Sacha Anastsio, dated September 30, 2016.)
An email from Mr. Anastasio dated October 3, 2016, also indicates that the agreement was
for a purchase price of $400,000.00 and that it was a cash deal and 30 day close. This is the
Offer that was presented to Mr. Anastasio on September 17, 2016. His email of October 3,
2016 Indicates that he had agreed to the material terms set forth in the September 17,
2016. (Tab D, email from Anastasio dated October 3, 2016)
Mr. Anastasio, acting on behalf of the Defendant, had agreed to sell the property to the
Plaintiff for $400,000.00. His reason for not perfecting the transaction is set forth in his
email dated October 3, 2016, which indicates he has decided to reopen the building located
at the Property, which was a bar/function facility for Legion Post 137.
Yr zZ.14, Based on other statements made by Mr. Anastasio to the local newspaper, on September
15, 2016, it appears that he had been planning to rebrand and reopen the building even
while he was negotiating with the Plaintiff. His statements to the local newspaper indicate
that on September 7, 2016, Mr. Anastasio had appeared before the Bd. of Selectmen in
Holbrook and represented to them that the building was going to change its name from
Legion Post 137 to the Liberty Publik House and that Mr. Anastasio would be the new
manager. (Tab E, News Article Published in Wicked Local Holbrook, dated September 15,
2016)
15. Based on this new article, which was discovered only after Mr. Anastasio refused to proceed
with the agreed upon sale, it is readily evident that Mr. Anastasio was not bargaining in
good faith and that he had no intention of actually proceeding with the sale.
16. Fortunately for the Plaintiff, Mr. Anastasio, through his written communication and that of
his agents, has indicated that he did in fact agree to sale in the amount of $400,000.00,
creating a legally enforceable contract for the sale of real estate.
COUNT!
SPECIFIC PERFORIIANCE OF A CONTRACT TO PURCHASE REAL ESTATE
17. The Plaintiff incorporates the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-46 as if specifically set
forth herein.
18. The Defendant and Plaintiff entered into a contract for the sale of real estate by the
Defendant to the Plaintiff, in the amount of $400,000.00.
19. The terms of the sale are memorialized in a written offer submitted by the Plaintiff to the
Defendant, dated September 17, 2016.
20. On or about September 30, 2016, the Defendant, acting through its agent, indicated that it
would not proceed with the sale of said real estate.
21. On or about October 3, 2016, Paul Anastasio, acting on behalf of the Defendant indicated
that the terms of the sale agreed upon were those set forth in the Offer dated September
17, 2016, but he had now changed his mind about selling the Property.22. As a direct result of the Defendant's failure to proceed and perfect the sale of the Property,
the Plaintiff has been caused to suffer damage and said damage, given the nature of real
property, is unique and can only be remedied by the sale of the Property to the Defendant.
Wherefore, the Plaintiff respectfully requests that this honorable court enter judgment
for the Plaintiff and order the Defendant to sell the Property to the Plaintiff upon the terms
agreed upon by the Parties,
THE PLAINTIFF REQUESTS TRIAL BY JURY ON ALL COUNTS
1, John Tassinari, Jr., being the Plaintiff in the above-captioned action, certify that | have read the
_ Complaint and the facts stated herein are true and no material facts have been omitted therefrom.
Signed under the pains and penalties of perjury this 5th day of January 2017.
Respectfully Submitted,
By Counsel for the Plaintiffs,
ean M. (gan
BBO; 29
Beagan Law Office, LLC
Zero Governors Avenue, unit 33
Medford, MA 02155
781-393-9948
Dated: January 5, 2017CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
On this 6th day of January 2017 I did cause to be served via first class mail a copy
of the Complaint with the revised attestation of Plaintiff on Counsel for the Defendant at
the following address:
Jason Carter, Esq.
Law Office of Jason Carter
21 McGrath Hwy. Suite 501
Quincy, MA 02169
ean W“Beagan
Preview
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS NORFOLK, SS. JOHN TASSINARIL, JR. Plaintiff, ve BUILDING ASSOCIATION of the WM, B, DALTON AMERICAN LEGION, INC. Defendant. SSS VERIFIED COMPLAINT PARTIES SUPERIOR COURT ‘TRIAL COURT DEPT, Ch No. 1682 CVOISCH 1. The Plaintiff, John Tassinari, Jr., is an individual who at all material times has resided at 68 Blueberry Rd., Abington, Norfolk County, Massachusetts. 2. The Defendant, Building Association of the WM 8. Dalton American Legion, Inc., isa corporation organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, with a registered office address of 777 Plymouth Street, Holbrook, Norfolk County, Massachusetts. FACTS 3. The Defendant is the owner of real property located at 777 Plymouth Street, Holbrook, Norfolk County, Massachusetts {the Property). 4. Atall times relevant to this Complaint, Paul A. Anastasio, was the President of the Defendant corporation as indicated in filings with the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and had the authority to contract on behalf of the Defendant; including the authority to bind the Defendant in regards to the sale of the Property. We!10. dq. 12. 13. The Property was listed for sale on the Multiple Listing Service. Sacha Anastsio of Lamachia Realty, Inc. was the listing agent. On or about September 14, 2016, the Plaintiff, through his real estate agent, presented a written Offer to Purchase the Property in the amount of $400,000.00, which was the price agreed upon between the parties, The Offer was subject to a mortgage contingency in the amount of $250,000.00. (Tab A, Offer dated September 14, 2016). The Offer was rejected by Paul Anastasio, acting on behalf of the Defendant, due to the fact that it contained a mortgage contingency and he wanted an offer with no mortgage contingency, a/k/a “a cash deal.” On or about September 17, 2016, the Plaintiff submitted a new written Offer in the amount of $400,000.00. In keeping with the response of Mr, Anastasio, the second offer was not subject to a mortgage contingency (Tab B, Offer dated September 17, 2016). Upon submitting the second Offer, the Plaintiff ordered a 21E test for the Property per the terms of the Offer and In reliance on the fact that the parties had a deal. Thereafter, Mr. Anastasio, acting on behalf of the Defendant, tefused to proceed with the sale of the Property. } ‘An email received from the listing agent indicated that Mr. Anastasio had agreed to the $400,000.00 purchase price but was now refusing to go forward with the deai. (Tab C, email from Sacha Anastsio, dated September 30, 2016.) An email from Mr. Anastasio dated October 3, 2016, also indicates that the agreement was for a purchase price of $400,000.00 and that it was a cash deal and 30 day close. This is the Offer that was presented to Mr. Anastasio on September 17, 2016. His email of October 3, 2016 Indicates that he had agreed to the material terms set forth in the September 17, 2016. (Tab D, email from Anastasio dated October 3, 2016) Mr. Anastasio, acting on behalf of the Defendant, had agreed to sell the property to the Plaintiff for $400,000.00. His reason for not perfecting the transaction is set forth in his email dated October 3, 2016, which indicates he has decided to reopen the building located at the Property, which was a bar/function facility for Legion Post 137. Yr zZ.14, Based on other statements made by Mr. Anastasio to the local newspaper, on September 15, 2016, it appears that he had been planning to rebrand and reopen the building even while he was negotiating with the Plaintiff. His statements to the local newspaper indicate that on September 7, 2016, Mr. Anastasio had appeared before the Bd. of Selectmen in Holbrook and represented to them that the building was going to change its name from Legion Post 137 to the Liberty Publik House and that Mr. Anastasio would be the new manager. (Tab E, News Article Published in Wicked Local Holbrook, dated September 15, 2016) 15. Based on this new article, which was discovered only after Mr. Anastasio refused to proceed with the agreed upon sale, it is readily evident that Mr. Anastasio was not bargaining in good faith and that he had no intention of actually proceeding with the sale. 16. Fortunately for the Plaintiff, Mr. Anastasio, through his written communication and that of his agents, has indicated that he did in fact agree to sale in the amount of $400,000.00, creating a legally enforceable contract for the sale of real estate. COUNT! SPECIFIC PERFORIIANCE OF A CONTRACT TO PURCHASE REAL ESTATE 17. The Plaintiff incorporates the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-46 as if specifically set forth herein. 18. The Defendant and Plaintiff entered into a contract for the sale of real estate by the Defendant to the Plaintiff, in the amount of $400,000.00. 19. The terms of the sale are memorialized in a written offer submitted by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, dated September 17, 2016. 20. On or about September 30, 2016, the Defendant, acting through its agent, indicated that it would not proceed with the sale of said real estate. 21. On or about October 3, 2016, Paul Anastasio, acting on behalf of the Defendant indicated that the terms of the sale agreed upon were those set forth in the Offer dated September 17, 2016, but he had now changed his mind about selling the Property.22. As a direct result of the Defendant's failure to proceed and perfect the sale of the Property, the Plaintiff has been caused to suffer damage and said damage, given the nature of real property, is unique and can only be remedied by the sale of the Property to the Defendant. Wherefore, the Plaintiff respectfully requests that this honorable court enter judgment for the Plaintiff and order the Defendant to sell the Property to the Plaintiff upon the terms agreed upon by the Parties, THE PLAINTIFF REQUESTS TRIAL BY JURY ON ALL COUNTS 1, John Tassinari, Jr., being the Plaintiff in the above-captioned action, certify that | have read the _ Complaint and the facts stated herein are true and no material facts have been omitted therefrom. Signed under the pains and penalties of perjury this 5th day of January 2017. Respectfully Submitted, By Counsel for the Plaintiffs, ean M. (gan BBO; 29 Beagan Law Office, LLC Zero Governors Avenue, unit 33 Medford, MA 02155 781-393-9948 Dated: January 5, 2017CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this 6th day of January 2017 I did cause to be served via first class mail a copy of the Complaint with the revised attestation of Plaintiff on Counsel for the Defendant at the following address: Jason Carter, Esq. Law Office of Jason Carter 21 McGrath Hwy. Suite 501 Quincy, MA 02169 ean W“Beagan