Cases
To discuss these cases please contact Attorney David J. Paliotti at GNF&P.
GNF&P selects interesting cases to feature, either pending or recently resolved, in which it is involved.
To protect the privacy of our clients, we do not identify the parties to the case.
 |
||
|
|
||
|
|
Wrongful Foreclosure ReversedWrongful Foreclosure Reversed
David Paliotti recently was able to persuade the attorney for a bank which had conducted a wrongful foreclosure sale of an individual's home in a suburb North of Boston, at the same time that this lender was separately discussing the possibility of a loan modification, to rescind the foreclosure sale and return the deposit made by a third-party buyer. This was accomplished by sending a detailed, factual letter with substantial documentation, without the time and expense of filing a lawsuit. Attorney Paliotti is now in the process of obtaining financial relief for this client, as well as a favorable modification of the client's sub-prime home mortgage loan, which was a negative amortization loan.
Easement Across a Private Way - to the Shoreline
David Paliotti and Sharon Petrillo have been retained to prosecute an appeal to the Massachusetts Appeals Court of a Land Court judgment granting certain plaintiffs a prescriptive easement to use a private way owned by our clients to access a small piece of shoreline only a few feet from their home. We were able to persuade the Land Court, over the strenuous objection of the plaintiffs, to permit our clients to place an unlocked gate across the private way and to limit the use of the private way while the appeal is pending. One of the primary issues in the case is whether use of this private way and the adjacent shoreline, which was permitted by the abutters as a matter of neighborly accommodation, can be sufficiently open and notorious to be adverse and confer easement rights on the persons using it.
Mortgage Foreclosure Scam
David Paliotti successfully negotiated a favorable settlement in a case where our client was the victim of a mortgage foreclosure rescue scam. Mr. Paliotti was able to secure a reduction in the principal amount of the mortgage by more than $100,000, as well as a cash payment towards attorney's fees.
Challenge to Boston's Zoning Law Limiting Rentals to College Students
Stephen Greenbaum and Sharon Petrillo represent a group of property owners who are challenging a recent amendment to the City of Boston's Zoning Code. This new amendment limits the number of full time college students who can live together in an apartment, regardless of its size. This is an area of first impression in Massachusetts, as no other city or town has enacted anything like this. Over the strenuous objection of the City, we were able to obtain an Order from the Land Court permitting us to conduct extensive discovery. We continue to press the claims of our clients in this action. Just recently, a City Councilor proposed a new ordinance which would require colleges and universities to inform the City when more than four students live together off campus. It is our opinion that such an ordinance would violate federal privacy law.
City of Quincy License Not Required to Operate Drive-Through Coffee Shop
David Paliotti represents a company in a long-running dispute with the City of Quincy regarding the opening of a drive-through coffee shop. Mr. Paliotti obtained an injunction and later a declaratory judgment from the Norfolk Superior Court that the ordinance on which the City relied in claiming that a license was required, clearly and unequivocally did not apply to our client. We are now in the process of scheduling a jury trial on our client's request for monetary damages against the City based on its egregious conduct.
Eviction Prevented, Forged Signature on Mortgage
Stephen Greenbaum and Sharon Petrillo represent a client whose name was allegedly forged by his wife on a mortgage without his knowledge or consent. Prior to our involvement, the bank holding the mortgage, which had been sold or assigned multiple times, had conducted a foreclosure auction and, at the time GNF&P was retained, had commenced eviction proceedings. Attorneys Greenbaum and Petrillo were able to obtain an injunction from the Superior Court preventing the eviction from going forward and are now prosecuting claims on behalf of our client against a number of parties.
Condominium Conversion - Real Estate Partnership Dispute
David Paliotti represents an individual who purchased a two family property in need of substantial renovations with the intention of performing most of the renovations himself, converting the property into two condominium units, selling one unit and owning the second unit. Prior to coming to GNF&P, the client entered into a verbal agreement with another individual whereby they would perform the renovations together, with our client teaching the individual how to do a lot of the work, and they would then share in any profit from selling one of the two units. A dispute arose between the client and the other individual, resulting in the other individual suing our client and obtaining a large attachment against the property before the renovations had been completed. Mr. Paliotti, after taking the case over from another attorney, was able to have the attachment lifted so the client could finish the renovations and sell one of the units. With the assistance of attorney Stacy Ochal, Mr. Paliotti then converted the property into two condominium units for the client, negotiated a purchase and sale agreement for one of the units, and assisted the client in refinancing the loan on the property so that the one unit could be sold with clear title. A new attachment, in an amount that is less than half of the original attachment, will now be recorded against only the remaining unit while the claims and counterclaims make their way through the Court. This case illustrates the importance of having a comprehensive partnership agreement in writing. Without relief from the original attachment, the property could not have been converted into a condominium and one unit sold, which may very well have resulted in the property being foreclosed upon.
School District Settles Negligence Claim by Student
David Paliotti and Stacy Ochal represented a high school student in litigation against a Regional School District arising from the School District's failure, and that of a chemistry teacher, department head and principal, to take any action to prevent the student from being exposed on a repeated basis to a known allergen. As a result of these repeated, and completely avoidable, exposures, the student developed brittle asthma. The School District vigorously defended against these claims, denying any liability. The case was settled for $60,000 at a mediation session. Prior to the mediation, the case had been scheduled for a two week jury trial but the trial was continued due to the unavailability of the judge. Prior to this continuance, the School District had refused to make any offer of settlement.
Homeowner Claims Substandard Home Renovations by Contractor
Stephen Greenbaum and Lauren Ruggles represented a homeowner in arbitration proceedings against a contractor for substandard renovations and repairs to his home, breach of contract, unlawful demand for payments and various other violations of the Home Improvement Contractor Act, resulting in an arbitration award in excess of $100,000 in favor of the homeowner and rejection of the contractor's claims that monies were due to it.
Wrongful Conduct By City Of Quincy Licensing Board Results In Judgment
Against City In Amount Of $184,000
David Paliotti represented a company in a long-running dispute with the City of Quincy and its Licensing Board regarding the opening of a drive-through coffee shop. Mr. Paliotti obtained an injunction and later a declaratory judgment from the Norfolk Superior Court ruling that the Ordinance on which the City relied in refusing to issue the requested license clearly and unequivocally did not apply. Recently, after a trial on the issue of damages, the Court awarded damages against the City of Quincy and several individual defendants based on their egregious misconduct in the amount of $184,000, which judgment has since been paid in full by the City.
