Michael Elbery v. Becket Woods Prudential Committee et al.
Federal District Court - Springfield, Mass. Docket#3:09-cv-30076MAP
This article includes the legal Procedures of the federal case, Elbery v. Becket Woods Prudential Committee et al.,. To see Federal Judge Michael Ponsor's Unconstitutional Decision on this case see "Harvard Law Grad Federal Michael Ponsor Insults the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights"
Elbery filed this federal case in the Federal District Court in Springfield, Mass. on May 18, '09. Plaintiff-Elbery then timely Amended that complaint. See Complaint/Lawsuit-Amended.
Four of the defendant's are attorneys, yet they decided they better hire legal counsel. Their first defense attorney, Harris Aaronson, quit the case because he could not handle the legal issues drafted by Elbery, per complaint.
Seven of the Prudential Committee Defendants filed an Answer to Elbery's complaint/lawsuit and Counter sued for Abuse of Process and Defamation (See page 17 and 18 of the Answer/Counterclaim for counterclaims).
The plaintiff, Michael Elbery, immediately filed a "Motion to Dismiss - the Prudential Committee's Counterclaim of Abuse of Process".
The Becket Woods Prudential Committee Defendants filed Opposition to the dismissal. And the plaintiff filed a "Reply to the Defendant's Opposition"
The Court Denied the Plaintiff's, Elbery's, Motion to Dismiss the "Abuse of Process Counterclaim" resulting in the Plaintiff asking for "Reconsideration of the Court's Decision". And the federal Court denied all motions for Reconsideration by the plaintiff - Elbery.
The plaintiff, Elbery, also filed an "Anti-Slapp Motion to Dismiss Defendants' Defamation Counterclaim and the defendants filed Opposition. And the federal Court Denied that plaintiff's - Elbery's Anti-Slapp Motion to Dismiss the Defendants' Defamation Counterclaim.
On 9-29-09, defendant Levey filed his answer to the plaintiff's complaint and a counterclaim (see page 19) later. On 9-28-09, the Becket Woods District Landscaper/snowplower and Defendant - Mark Millet. - Millet filed an answer and countersuit (see page 21).
The plaintiff, Michael Elbery, motioned to Dismiss both the Levey Counterclaim and Millet Counterclaim. And the federal court Denied plaintiff-Elbery's Motion to Dismiss Millet and Levey's counterclaim for Abuse of Process.
There were no Oppositions filed by defendants Millet and Levey Opposing the plaintiff's motion to dismiss their counterclaims.
The plaintiff then answered the Defendants' Counter claims and raised his Affirmative Defenses. See also Plaintiff's Answer to Counterclaim of Millet and Levey; the Affirmative Defenses are on page 2 for both.
Defendants Attorney Nancy Svirida and Jack "sprat" Siegel have not answered the plaintiff's complaint caused by them being allowed an extension of time on October 13, 2009.
On October 13, 2009, the Defendants' then filed a "Motion to Dismiss Counts I-X of the Plaintiff's Complaint Based on a Lack of Standing and Failure to State a Claim". The Plaintiff Opposed this Motion to Dismiss. The Defendant Replied to the Plaintiff's Opposition and the plaintiff filed an Answer to that reply.
As of this date, December 1st of 2010, there has been NO DECISION on the "Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Counts I-X of the Plaintiff's Complaint" which was, as above paragraph, filed a year ago. Michael Elbery's latest federal case appears to be in a deep freeze.
There have been no hearings on this case that is over 1 1/2 years old at this date 12-1-10.
Like to see all the documented illegalities and scandals in the District of Becket Woods (a government entity) go to
www.becketwoodswatch.net you won't be disappointed!