Tyler Chapman, Ian Pinta persuade judge to impose monetary sanction against opposing parties, lawyer for bad faith filing
Tyler E. Chapman and Ian J. Pinta persuaded a Massachusetts Superior Court judge to impose a monetary sanction against opposing parties and their counsel for a meritless, bad faith complaint in a longstanding probate lawsuit.
Judge Camille F. Sarrouf Jr. found that the opposing parties and their lawyer failed to identify any factual support in support of their opposition to a summary judgment motion in the case, which a different judge had previously granted in favor of Todd & Weld’s clients.
“[I]t was the Plaintiffs’ burden to come forward with evidence in support of their allegations,” Judge Sarrouf wrote, “[which] they wholly failed to do.”
Findings in the summary judgment ruling established that the plaintiffs’ claims “were wholly insubstantial and frivolous … and not advanced in good faith,” the judge noted. The plaintiffs failed to produce any evidence supporting their allegations of undue influence or fraud related to the transfer of trust assets.
Mr. Chapman and Mr. Pinta also argued that the plaintiffs knew before they filed suit that the probate claims were barred by the statute of limitations, and their arguments in support of tolling the deadline to file the suit had no basis in fact or law. Yet, the plaintiffs continued to aggressively litigate the case for nearly 10 years, forcing their clients to defend against the claims.
The judge determined that the attorney for the plaintiffs knew the plaintiffs’ claims were meritless and he advanced the lawsuit in bad faith. As a consequence, he ruled that the attorney is jointly and severally liable for the attorneys’ fees and costs separately imposed against the plaintiffs.