Preview
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT
BARNSTABLE, ss. SUPERIOR COUR’ f
CIVIL ACTION NO 1372CV00125
Hpi [18
RICK YATSENICK AND JOAL YATSENICK, 4 LC ull
Plaintiffs, 3 pe cow, ( Lldee, 9)
v. / pli if; ilollipnar
a
OLD WHARF VILLAGE, LLC, Ags Cla
CHARLES EDGAR, DAVID DILLON uw)
D/B/A/ DILLON REAL ESTATE, and a é
STACEY CURLEY, of
Defendants. ( Aye
no"
DEFENDANTS’, OLD WHARF VILLAGE, LLC AND CHARLES EDG-
MOTION IN LIMINE TO PROHIBIT ALL REFERENCE TO
405 OLD WHARF VILLAGE ROAD AS A
COMMERCIAL MOTEL OR TIMESHARE PROPERTY
The Defendants, Old Wharf Village, LLC and Charles Edgar (collectively “Defendants”),
by and through counsel, hereby respectfully move in limine to preclude the Plaintiffs from
referring to 405 Old Wharf Village Road as a commercial motel or timeshare during jury
selection, opening statements, examination of witnesses, and closing argument, because any such
reference misstates the evidence and risks unfair prejudice to the defendants. Throughout this
litigation, Plaintiffs’ counsel has frequently made statements to the effect that the Plaintiffs
“bought a room in a commercial motel” or a “time share.”
While it is true that the property had operated as a motel under prior owners, and that the
prior owners sought to establish the property as timeshare estates, the evidence—well-known to
the Plaintiffs--will show that the property had not operated as anything at all for years beforeDefendant Old Wharf Village, LLC purchased the property at a foreclosure auction. More
importantly, the evidence, again well known to the Plaintiffs, will show that the Defendants
never operated the property as a motel in the traditional sense, or as timeshare estates. The
evidence will show that the Defendants renovated one of the buildings to create thirteen separate
units with bedrooms, baths and a kitchen, and then filed a Master Deed with the Land Court
establishing the units as condominiums under G.L. c. 183A in February, 2010, not G.L. c. 183B
(the timeshare statute)—four months before the Plaintiffs purchased their unit. Asserting that the
Plaintiffs purchased “a room in a commercial motel” or a “timeshare” is therefore not a
reasonable inference, mischaracterizes the evidence, and would unfairly prejudice the
defendants. See Commonwealth v. Morganti, 455 Mass. 388, 407 (2009) (inferences from
evidence must be reasonable).
WHEREFORE, the Defendants request that the court order the Plaintiffs not to assert that the
Plaintiffs purchased a room in a commercial motel or a timeshare estate.
Respectfully submitted,
OLD WHARF VILLAGE, LLC and
CHARLES EDGAR,
By their attorneys,
Djuna / ne Esq. BBO# 561909
Lynne M. Chiodo, Esq. BBO# 657428
DP Law
619 High Street, Suite 103
Dedham, MA 02026
(781) 326-6320
dp@djunaperkinslaw.com
\chiodo@djunaperkinslaw.com
DATED: March 14, 2018CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on March 14, 2018, I served a true ani UST correct copy of this document
upon all counsel of record via email and@tst-class mail gy %|
SIIB
SD
Preview
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT BARNSTABLE, ss. SUPERIOR COUR’ f CIVIL ACTION NO 1372CV00125 Hpi [18 RICK YATSENICK AND JOAL YATSENICK, 4 LC ull Plaintiffs, 3 pe cow, ( Lldee, 9) v. / pli if; ilollipnar a OLD WHARF VILLAGE, LLC, Ags Cla CHARLES EDGAR, DAVID DILLON uw) D/B/A/ DILLON REAL ESTATE, and a é STACEY CURLEY, of Defendants. ( Aye no" DEFENDANTS’, OLD WHARF VILLAGE, LLC AND CHARLES EDG- MOTION IN LIMINE TO PROHIBIT ALL REFERENCE TO 405 OLD WHARF VILLAGE ROAD AS A COMMERCIAL MOTEL OR TIMESHARE PROPERTY The Defendants, Old Wharf Village, LLC and Charles Edgar (collectively “Defendants”), by and through counsel, hereby respectfully move in limine to preclude the Plaintiffs from referring to 405 Old Wharf Village Road as a commercial motel or timeshare during jury selection, opening statements, examination of witnesses, and closing argument, because any such reference misstates the evidence and risks unfair prejudice to the defendants. Throughout this litigation, Plaintiffs’ counsel has frequently made statements to the effect that the Plaintiffs “bought a room in a commercial motel” or a “time share.” While it is true that the property had operated as a motel under prior owners, and that the prior owners sought to establish the property as timeshare estates, the evidence—well-known to the Plaintiffs--will show that the property had not operated as anything at all for years beforeDefendant Old Wharf Village, LLC purchased the property at a foreclosure auction. More importantly, the evidence, again well known to the Plaintiffs, will show that the Defendants never operated the property as a motel in the traditional sense, or as timeshare estates. The evidence will show that the Defendants renovated one of the buildings to create thirteen separate units with bedrooms, baths and a kitchen, and then filed a Master Deed with the Land Court establishing the units as condominiums under G.L. c. 183A in February, 2010, not G.L. c. 183B (the timeshare statute)—four months before the Plaintiffs purchased their unit. Asserting that the Plaintiffs purchased “a room in a commercial motel” or a “timeshare” is therefore not a reasonable inference, mischaracterizes the evidence, and would unfairly prejudice the defendants. See Commonwealth v. Morganti, 455 Mass. 388, 407 (2009) (inferences from evidence must be reasonable). WHEREFORE, the Defendants request that the court order the Plaintiffs not to assert that the Plaintiffs purchased a room in a commercial motel or a timeshare estate. Respectfully submitted, OLD WHARF VILLAGE, LLC and CHARLES EDGAR, By their attorneys, Djuna / ne Esq. BBO# 561909 Lynne M. Chiodo, Esq. BBO# 657428 DP Law 619 High Street, Suite 103 Dedham, MA 02026 (781) 326-6320 dp@djunaperkinslaw.com \chiodo@djunaperkinslaw.com DATED: March 14, 2018CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on March 14, 2018, I served a true ani UST correct copy of this document upon all counsel of record via email and@tst-class mail gy %| SIIB SD