MISC 03-293002

January 15, 2010

ESSEX, ss.

Piper, J.


This action commenced on July 11, 2003 in the Superior Court for the County of Essex with the filing of a verified complaint. On September 23, 2003, a judge of that court transferred the case to the Land Court Department, where it was received on September 29, 2003. The verified complaint requests a determination of the boundary line between the property (“Bailey Property”) of the plaintiff, Charles M. Bailey and the property (“Bonanno Property”) of the defendant, Christine Bonanno (“Bonanno”). Bonanno, by counterclaim, requested a declaration of the boundary line, and pleaded, in the alternative, claims of title by adverse possession.

Bonanno filed a third-party complaint against Maura Bailey, who owns 462 Boxford Road as tenant by the entirety with Charles M. Bailey (collectively, “the Baileys”). [Note 1] Defendant Business Lenders, LLC, (“Business Lenders”) intervened on June 30, 2008.

The Baileys are the owners of the 1.1 acre parcel of land with the buildings thereon situated at 462 Boxford Road, in Haverhill, Essex County, Massachusetts, which is more particularly described in the deed (“Bailey Deed”) dated November 30, 1993 and recorded with the Essex County (South District) Registry of Deeds (“Registry”) at Book 12276, Page 457.

Bonanno is the owner of a parcel of land, measuring 16.781 acres, more or less, with the buildings thereon situated at 480 Boxford Road, Haverhill, Essex County, Massachusetts which is more particularly described in the deed dated October 21, 1997 and recorded with the Registry at Book 14383, Page 48. Bonanno resides at 480 Boxford Road. The Bonanno property abuts the Bailey Property and is situated immediately to the northwest of the Baileys’ premises.

The total land area in dispute measures approximately 10,800 square feet and is shown as the “Disputed Area” on a certain Exhibit Plan prepared for Charles M. and Maura F. Bailey by Christiansen & Sergi Professional Engineers Land Survey, dated June 1, 2006, and included in the trial record as Exhibit 17 (“Sergi Plan”“Exhibit Plan” or “Exhibit 17”). The Disputed Area includes a rectangular parcel of land to the rear of the Bailey Property and a narrow triangular piece of property that runs along the southerly boundary of the Bailey Property.

This case came on to be tried to the court, which, in a decision of even date, has made findings of fact and rulings of law. In accordance with the court’s decision, it is

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECLARED that the boundary lines between the Bailey Property and the Bonanno Property are as shown and depicted on the Exhibit Plan dated June 1, 2006, prepared by Michael Sergi, PLS, and included in the record as Exhibit 17, and the plaintiffs Bailey hold their title to the Disputed Area free of any right, title, interest, or claim, of the defendant Bonanno, and of anyone holding by through or under Bonanno, including, without limitation, defendant Business Lenders, LLC. It is further

ORDERED that Bonanno, and her heirs, assigns and successors in title to the Bonanno Property at 480 Boxford Road in Haverhill, are permanently enjoined and restrained from entering upon, or making any use or occupation of, the Disputed Area as shown on Exhibit 17. It is further

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that nothing in this Judgment shall extend to, alter, impair, diminish, or affect the right, title and interest in the Bonanno Property of any person holding a record interest in the Bonanno Property who (a) has not been named as a party to this proceeding in this court, or (b) who does not hold, by duly recorded instrument, by or under such a named party to this proceeding. It is further

ORDERED that, upon payment of all fees established by law, this Judgment, or a certified copy of it, may be recorded with the Registry, and may there be marginally referenced on the record of the Bailey Deed and any instruments given and recorded under and subsequent to the Deed.

By the Court. (Piper, J).


Deborah J. Patterson


Dated: January 15, 2010.


[Note 1] The court (Piper, J.) allowed a subsequent motion to redesignate Maura Bailey as co-plaintiff-in-chief.