Court Denies Motion to Transfer Van Liew's Latest 9 North Road Suit to Land Court
A date for the next hearing has not been set.
A Middlesex Superior Court judge has ruled against moving Roland Van Liew's latest 9 North Road lawsuit against the town to land court, according to town officials.
The town has filed a motion to dismiss the matter.
The suit was filed on April 30 and names the current Board of Selectmen, as well as the 2009 and 2010 Board of Selectmen.
Town Manager Paul Cohen said the lawsuit is basically a re-hashing of the issue, which was already decided about two years ago in land court in favor of the town.
"This may mean that the judge feels comfortable ruling on the case rather than passing it on," said Cohen. "No date has been set on a hearing for the Town’s motion to dismiss the complaint."
John Doe
9:17 am on Friday, June 29, 2012
Notice how any mention of who filed the motion is conveniently left out. Per the usual bias reporting of this "news outlet" the headline makes it sound bad for van liew.
Maybe it was van liew who filed the motion, but maybe it was the town who lost here. Land court has certainly not been kind to van liew, or to those seeking to retain open space in general. A report back in 2009 showed land court ruled in favor of developers more than 80% of the time.
Anyway, virtually no one agrees with the decisions the town made on 9 north road. That was shown when over 40% of the town voted to recall the entire board. In fact, if you take out friends and neighbors of the selectmen who simply voted to protect their "buddies", and I'd say more than half of everyday residents wanted them gone.
But of course they don't wake up, they simply see it as validation and continue doing business as usual.
Donna Reed
9:41 am on Friday, June 29, 2012
We all know what the final outcome will be...after all, we've been down this road enough times already. But I don't care what anyone says....If nothing else.....I think we have to give Mr. Roland Van Liew an A+ for tenacity.
The Mayor
7:25 am on Saturday, June 30, 2012
I agree with john doe,i have dealt personally with the Chelmsford buddy system.When one dog barks they all bark together.All the people that rvl is sueing deserve to be sued.He has been harrassed by all of them.Not one day goes by without some nasty comments on the in town report about him.Good for RVL.
Mike Combs
10:41 am on Saturday, June 30, 2012
I'm being deposed on Monday by Phil Eliopoulos in his defamation suit. You don't hear about it much but the lawsuits go in both directions. As requested, I produced all four years of emails and documents they requested. I don't have anything to hide. Phil is the Selectman who behaved wrongly and residents have every right to speak out about elected officials.
Tyler Jozefowicz
8:17 am on Saturday, June 30, 2012
Residents of chelmsford should be reminded that even though the 9 North Rd land was transferred to the new owners, the deed restriction stays, granting " the inhabitants of Chelmsford the right to enjoy and use the land( what's left). So have a picnic, spread a blanket, yes , feed the ducks. Notice that a fake coyote has been erected by the owners on the grass to scare away the geese that have been their for decades, and no picnic table. Don't be intimidated, enjoy the town land rights.
Paul
12:28 pm on Saturday, June 30, 2012
Who was responsible for the coyote statues? Looks stupid. Can we get those taken out?
John Doe
9:08 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
As the sun points out today, it was the town who filed this motion and lost their attempt to transfer the case to land court (which they know nearly always sides with developers).
As usual, this outlet does all it can to defame van liew and protect town officials.
lucy
7:03 am on Wednesday, July 4, 2012
The misrepresentation of the facts here are amazing to me. RVL deserves credit - most of us don't have the guts to do the right thing.
Lucy
lucy
7:04 am on Wednesday, July 4, 2012
The thing about the coyote is hilarious . . . do we know for sure who put that there?