Laserfiche WebLink
u.nNnvn No r[LUAry KOPELMAN AND PAIGE. P. C. JEANNE s MCKNIGNT <br /> illry n:f:c. CAII:[ JUDITH CUTLFR <br /> f: epi IH & I.1L ATTORNFYS AT LAW ANNE-MARIE M HYLAND <br /> r.. RICHARD 00N1`N <br /> u ulry O C.ID FGIb Ir:I ANLN SIR[ f 7 CNI RYL ANN BANKS <br /> - 9C•Sl(TV Mg5S4CNU$FTTS 02110 1137 SANDRA CHARTON <br /> ILAMAIRK <br /> EVERETTJ MARDER BRIAN W RILEY <br /> PATRICK I COSTELLO BOSTON OFFICE BRIAN W RIGIO <br /> 16171951-0007 MARY GIO RGIO <br /> JOSEPH L TEHAN JR FAX 617,951 2735 KATHLEEN E CONNOLLY <br /> WILLIAM HEWIG 111 NORTHAMPTON OFFICE JOINING GANNON <br /> THERESA M DOWDY I1131 585-8632 KURT 8 FLIEGAUF <br /> OFPnRAH A ELI&FI,N MICHELE E RANDAZZO <br /> WURLESTLR OFFICE PETER J FEUERSACH <br /> 15081 752 0203 <br /> August 30, 1995 <br /> David R. Harsch, Esq. <br /> 33 East Main Street <br /> Hyannis, MA 02601-3100 <br /> Re: Margaret C. Harsch, et al. <br /> v. Town of Mashpee and <br /> Town of Mashpee Finance Committee <br /> Barnstable Superior Court. C.A. No. 95-359 <br /> Dear Mr. Harsch: <br /> I have reviewed the matter of a stipulation of dismissal of <br /> the above-referenced action with the Board of Selectmen. Please <br /> be advised that the Board does not accept the revisions made to <br /> my proposed stipulation, which was forwarded to you by facsimile <br /> on June 28, 1995. <br /> As you may well appreciate, the Board is particularly <br /> concerned that any record in these proceedings accurately reflect <br /> the facts which formed the basis for your clients' complaint. <br /> Therefore, the deletion of the language in the first paragraph of <br /> the stipulation concerning the Finance Committee meeting of May <br /> 2, 1995 cannot be accepted. In this regard, I believe that your <br /> deletion is unnecessary, because paragraph 1 states the essential <br /> fact that there was a violation of G.L. c. 39, §23B. <br /> As to your proposed addition of, a paragraph 5 concerning the <br /> responsibility of each party for its own costs, the Board is <br /> acutely sensitive to the fact that the main thrust of this <br /> litigation was to stop commencement of the Town Hall repair work <br /> under Article 15 of the 1995 Spring Annual Town Meeting. As you <br /> know, the Superior Court summarily denied your clients' request <br /> for a preliminary injunction against the commencement of work by <br /> the Town. For the reasons stated in the Town's memorandum in <br /> opposition to vour motion, the Board can only se=_ the Court's <br /> denial as clear evidence of the lack of any realistic legal basis <br /> PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER <br />