These companion cases were tried, evidence was closed, and the parties submitted post-trial briefs and made oral arguments. The cases are now under advisement. On September 16, 2020, Winchester Boat Club, Inc. (WBC), the defendant in case 16 MISC 000688 (the private title case) and the plaintiff in the other cases (the zoning cases), filed the Motion of Winchester Boat Club, Inc. to Reopen Evidence (Motion to Reopen Evidence). Plaintiffs'/Intervenors' Response to Winchester Boat Club Motion to Reopen Evidence was filed on September 29, 2020. On September 30, 2020, both the Defendant Zoning Board of Appeals's Response to Plaintiff Winchester Boat Club's Motion to Reopen Evidence and the Response of Winchester Boat Club, Inc. to Plaintiffs'/Intervenors' Response to Motion to Reopen Evidence were filed. The Supplemental Response to Winchester Boat Club Motion to Reopen Evidence was filed on October 2, 2020. Pursuant to Land Court Rule 6, the court decides the Motion to Reopen Evidence without hearing.
A motion to reopen evidence after trial is decided within the court's discretion. Clark v. Leisure Woods Estates, Inc., 89 Mass. App. Ct. 87 , 95 (2016); Dominick v. Dominick, 18 Mass. App. Ct. 85 , 90 (1984). WBC seeks to reopen the evidence in these cases to present evidence that Kathleen Ho and Timothy O'Donnell have purchased a house in Lexington. The presumption raised is that Ms. Ho and Mr. O'Donnell are about sell the property in Winchester that is the subject of the private title case, thus rendering the private title case moot and depriving them of standing in that case and the zoning cases.
There are no grounds for reopening the evidence. While Ms. Ho and Mr. O'Donnell appear to have purchased a property in Lexington, there is no evidence that have conveyed their property in Winchester. They remain entitled to an adjudication of their claims. Even if they were to convey that property, the remedy would be to substitute the new owners as plaintiffs, not to dismiss the case. Finally, whether or not Ms. Ho and Mr. O'Donnell continue to own their Winchester property is irrelevant to the zoning cases. While they were allowed to intervene in those cases along with several other neighbors, the defendant is the Winchester Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). It is the ZBA that is defending its decisions that are at issue in those cases.
For the foregoing reasons, the Motion to Reopen Evidence is DENIED. [Note 1]
SO ORDERED.
KATHLEEN K. HO and TIMOTHY O'DONNELL, Plaintiffs v. WINCHESTER BOAT CLUB, Defendant WINCHESTER BOAT CLUB, Plaintiff, v. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF WINCHESTER, and LAWRENCE BEALS, DONNA JALBERT PATALANO, RICHARD L. SAMPSON, JR., DOROTHY R. SIMBOLI, JONATHAN GYORY, and KEVIN SARNEY, members of the Zoning Board of Appeals of Winchester, Defendants