Armstrong v. Theoharides, 010320 MASUP , 1884CV02132BLS1

Docket Nº:1884CV02132BLS1
Opinion Judge:Brian A. Davis Associate Justice of the Superior Court
Party Name:Armstrong v. Theoharides et al.
Judge Panel:Judge (with first initial, no space for Sullivan, Dorsey, and Walsh): Davis, Brian A., J.
Case Date:January 03, 2020
Court:Superior Court of Massachusetts
 
FREE EXCERPT

Armstrong

v.

Theoharides et al.

No. 1884CV02132BLS1

Superior Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk, Business Litigation Session

January 3, 2020

Judge (with first initial, no space for Sullivan, Dorsey, and Walsh): Davis, Brian A., J.

DECISION AND ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ENTRY OF SEPARATE AND FINAL JUDGMENT (DOCKET ENTRY NO. 34.0)

Brian A. Davis Associate Justice of the Superior Court

This case involves a dispute over a proposed commercial development along Boston’s downtown waterfront. Plaintiffs are members of the Harbor Towers condominium community situated on Boston Harbor (the "Harbor Towers Plaintiffs"). They allege that defendant RHDC 70 East India, LLC’s ("RHDC") plans to construct a 600-foot-tall tower on the site of the multi-story parking garage adjacent to Harbor Towers in which various residents currently park their motor vehicles (the "Harbor Garage") will unlawfully interfere with their permanent parking rights and harm the environment. They further allege that the decisions of defendant Secretary of the Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, and defendant Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (collectively, with RHDC, the "Defendants"), to approve the City of Boston’s "Downtown Waterfront District Municipal Harbor Plan," which purportedly opens the door to the construction of RHDC’s planned 600-foot-tall tower on the Boston waterfront, are ultra vires and, therefore, invalid.

On October 17, 2019, this Court issued a lengthy decision and order (the "October 2019 Decision and Order") in this action and in its companion case, Conservation Law Foundation v. Beaton, Case No. 1884CV02144-BLS1 (the "CLF Case"), that allowed part, but not all, of the Defendants’ motions to dismiss both cases. One of the claims that the Court dismissed on summary judgment is Count IV of the Harbor Towers Plaintiffs’ Complaint seeking a judicial declaration that RHDC has an obligation under a certain "Land Disposition Agreement" (the "LDA") to provide permanent parking to the residents of Harbor Towers. As to Count IV, the Court ruled that "[t]he LDA, construed as a whole...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP