This action was filed by Benedict Germaine, Kathleen M. Marsella, and Kathleen A. Marsella against Defendants Eric Bleicken and John Gomez, Jr. on February 7, 2003, seeking to establish their title to certain parcels of land on Fales Road and Allen Street in Plainville. When Defendants did not file a responsive pleading, a Default Judgment entered on December 16, 2003, ruling and declaring that plaintiffs held their titles to Lots 37 and 37A on a certain plan entitled APlan of Land in Plainville, Mass. Drawn for Germaine & Marsella June 1980 Scale 1"=40' W. T. Whelan Eng. Co. 6 Whipple St., No. Attleboro, Mass", which plan is filed with Norfolk Registry of Deeds and filed as Plan No.149 of 1981, Plan Book 282, free from any claims of the defendants. Lots 37B and 37C, also shown on that plan, had been sold by the plaintiffs prior to the bringing of the action and were not at issue in the case at that time.
On July 13, 2004, Defendant Eric Bleicken filed a motion for relief from judgment, claiming that he is the owner of an undivided one-fourth interest in all four lots shown on the plan and praying that the Default Judgment be vacated and set aside because he has been induced by fraudulent activity on the part of plaintiffs= counsel not to file a responsive pleading to claim his interest in all four lots. Bleicken=s motion was denied by a Justice of this court but said denial was reversed by the Appeals Court in a Memorandum and Order dated February 1, 2006, which remanded the case to the Land Court for further proceedings. Defendant Bleicken then filed counterclaims against the original plaintiffs and the present owners of all four lots, once again contending that he is the owner of an undivided one-fourth interest therein, having inherited that interest under the estate of his mother, Ellene Bleicken. Motions filed seeking dismissal of Bleicken=s counterclaims and seeking also reinstatement of the previously issued judgment were denied by this court (Trombly, J.)
Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants-in-Counterclaim Domingos and Dyer, owners of Lots 37C and 37B respectively, were allowed by the court in a decision dated April 15, 2009, finding and ruling that said parties had established their interests in lots 37C and 37B by adverse possession and ouster, and ruling also that Bleicken was barred from claiming any interest therein under the doctrines of laches and estoppel by deed.
Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant-in-Counterclaim Raymond C. Loughlin, owner of Lot 37A, and by Defendants-in-Counterclaim Benedict Germaine, Kathleen M. Marsella, Kathleen A. Marsella, and Alfred A. Marsella, owners and former owners of Lot 37, were argued and taken under advisement on June 4, 2009. After careful consideration of all of the evidence, the court issued a Decision today allowing the motions for summary judgment of defendants-in-counterclaim Loughlin and of Germaine and Marsella, ruling that Bleicken has no interest in Lots 37 and 37A, the moving parties having established their respective titles under the doctrines of adverse possession and ouster, and further ruling that Loughlin was a bona fide purchaser and that Bleicken is barred under the doctrine of estoppel by deed from claiming any such interest in those lots.
In accordance with the above, it is hereby
ADJUDGED and ORDERED that Defendants-in-Counterclaim Kathleen A. Marsella and Kathleen M. Marsella are the owners of Lot 37 as shown on the aforementioned plan free and clear of any interests claimed by Defendant Eric Bleicken, having established their title under the doctrines of adverse possession and ouster, the court further ruling that Bleicken is barred by the doctrines of laches and estoppel by deed from claiming any interest therein; and it is further
ADJUDGED and ORDERED that Defendant-in-Counterclaim Raymond C. Loughlin is the owner of Lot 37A as shown on the aforementioned plan free and clear of any interest claimed by Defendant Eric Bleicken, having established his title under the doctrines of adverse possession and ouster, the court having also ruled that Loughlin was a bona fide purchaser and that Bleicken is barred under the doctrines of laches and estoppel by deed from making any such claims; and
it is further
ADJUDGED and ORDERED that Defendants-in-Counterclaim Ronald R. Dyer and Ursula Dyer are the owners of Lots 37B as shown on the aforementioned plan free and clear of any interests claimed by Defendant Eric Bleicken, having established their title under the doctrines of adverse possession and ouster, the court further ruling that Bleicken is barred by the doctrines of laches and estoppel by deed from making any such claims; and it is further
ADJUDGED and ORDERED that Defendants-in-Counterclaim Louis Domingos, Jr. and
Colleen Domingos are the owners of Lot 37C as shown on the aforementioned plan free and clear of any interests claimed by Defendant Eric Bleicken, having established their title under the doctrines of adverse possession and ouster, the court further ruling that Bleicken is barred by the doctrines of laches and estoppel by deed from making any such claims.
By the Court. (Trombly, J.)
Attest:
Deborah J. Patterson
Recorder
Dated: July 27, 2009
BENEDICT GERMAINE, KATHLEEN M. MARSELLA, and KATHLEEN A.MARSELLA v. ERIC BLEICKEN and JOHN GOMEZ, JR.. ERIC BLEICKEN, Plaintiff-in-Counterclaim v. BENEDICT GERMAINE, KATHLEEN M. MARSELLA, KATHLEEN A. MARSELLA, ALFRED A. MARSELLA, LOUIS DOMINGOS, COLLEEN DOMINGOS, RONALD R. DYER, URSULA L. DYER, and RAYMOND C. LOUGHLIN, Defendants-in-Counterclaim