Opinion
15-P-249
02-25-2016
BARBARA J. MONOPOLI v. BOARD OF MANAGERS OF OCEAN SPRAY CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION.
NOTICE: Summary decisions issued by the Appeals Court pursuant to its rule 1:28, as amended by 73 Mass. App. Ct. 1001 (2009), are primarily directed to the parties and, therefore, may not fully address the facts of the case or the panel's decisional rationale. Moreover, such decisions are not circulated to the entire court and, therefore, represent only the views of the panel that decided the case. A summary decision pursuant to rule 1:28 issued after February 25, 2008, may be cited for its persuasive value but, because of the limitations noted above, not as binding precedent. See Chace v. Curran, 71 Mass. App. Ct. 258, 260 n.4 (2008).
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
The plaintiff condominium unit owner, Barbara J. Monopoli, appeals from the summary judgment entered in her action against the defendant, the board of managers of Ocean Spray Condominium Association (board). We affirm.
Background. Monopoli has been involved in a long-running legal dispute with the board that began in 2003 when the board filed suit against her for building an unauthorized dormer in her unit. Since judgment entered in that case, Monopoli has filed four lawsuits against the board, mostly concerning assessments the board has levied against her to pay for its outstanding legal fees. The third in that series, filed in 2010, sought to obtain the board's bank records and financial statements for review. The parties reached an agreement in that case and a stipulation of dismissal entered with prejudice on November 2, 2010.
In May of 2011, Monopoli filed the present three-count complaint alleging breach of fiduciary duty, breach of duty of due care, and a right to an accounting from the year 2000 to present. On the defendant's motion for summary judgment, a judge of the Superior Court dismissed the first two counts of the complaint, by agreement of the parties, and ordered the accounting sought by Monopoli for the calendar years 2012, 2013, 2014, and annually going forward.
Analysis. On appeal, Monopoli argues that, in addition to the relief ordered, she is entitled to accountings for the years 2007, 2008, and 2009. The board counters that principles of res judicata apply to the years at issue that precede the filing of the current lawsuit, as Monopoli could have included those claims in her 2010 action. We agree. Claim preclusion "bars further litigation of all matters that were or should have been adjudicated in the [earlier] action." Bagley v. Moxley, 407 Mass. 633, 637-638 (1990), quoting from Heacock v. Heacock, 402 Mass. 21, 23 (1988). In her 2010 action, Monopoli raised concerns about the board's finances, but did not seek an independent, certified accounting, an annual requirement under the condominium's own by-laws, which predate the 2010 litigation. Because that case was dismissed, with prejudice, Monopoli is barred from raising matters that could have been fully litigated in that prior action. The judge did not err in ordering the accounting only for calendar years 2012 and later.
At the hearing on the motion for summary judgment in the instant case, Monopoli's counsel conceded that "the only [prior case] that dealt with the issue with the books, is the 2010 case. So from 2003 to 2010, she wasn't getting documentation from Robertson, who was acting as the treasurer. So she had to go to court and file a request with this court that those documents be produced. And they were, in 2010, the bank records and statements, and things of that nature were."
The 2010 dismissal, with prejudice, operates as a final judgment on the merits for the purposes of res judicata. See Massaro v. Walsh, 71 Mass. App. Ct. 562, 565 n.5 (2008).
Judgment affirmed.
Order denying motion for reconsideration, alteration, or amendment affirmed.
By the Court (Cohen, Katzmann & Blake, JJ.),
The panelists are listed in order of seniority. --------
/s/
Clerk Entered: February 25, 2016.