794 F. Supp. 2d 274
D. Mass.2011Background
- PCI sues Tucci for breach of contract related to a subcontract for Saks Fifth Avenue interior reconstruction in Boston, seeking $98,525.
- PCI also asserts Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act and related claims.
- PCI filed the complaint on December 18, 2009; Tucci answered in February 2010 and counterclaimed for breach of contract.
- Tucci moved for summary judgment on January 31, 2011; PCI did not oppose until March 15, 2011, triggering a motion to strike.
- The court denied Tucci's motion to strike; late opposition was not prejudicial and disputes existed, so summary judgment was inappropriate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of opposition on counterclaim | Opposition timely or its tardiness excusable, with disputed facts. | Opposition was untimely and should be struck. | Opposition not stricken; late but not prejudicial; disputed facts remain. |
| Whether genuine issues of material fact preclude summary judgment | Disputed facts exist on ticket function, delays, and double payment. | Evidence supports summary judgment on the counterclaim. | Summary judgment denied due to genuine issues of material fact. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mesnick v. Gen. Elec. Co., 950 F.2d 816 (1st Cir. 1991) (summary judgment standard and burden shifting)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (U.S. 1986) (burden on movant to show absence of genuine issue)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (U.S. 1986) (material facts and ultimate proof required for jury trial)
- Stonkus v. City of Brockton Sch. Dep't, 322 F.3d 97 (1st Cir. 2003) (late filings; prejudice analysis in summary judgment context)