From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nystedt v. Munroe

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Jan 26, 2012
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-10754-RWZ (D. Mass. Jan. 26, 2012)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-10754-RWZ

01-26-2012

DOUGLAS O. NYSTEDT, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Evan T. Nystedt v. EARL D. MUNROE, et al.


ORDER

ZOBEL, D.J.

Plaintiff, Douglas G. Nystedt, the administrator of the estate of his brother, Evan T. Nystedt ("Evan"), brought this action, the latest in a series of lawsuits against several defendants who allegedly defrauded Evan before and after his death. Defendant Eugene A. Nigro, an attorney, was appointed to serve as special discovery master by the Massachusetts Probate Court in one of the earlier lawsuits, a will contest between plaintiff and defendant Earl Munroe. He and his law firm, Nigro, Pettepit & Lucas, LLP, along with the other defendants, are charged in several counts with racketeering and racketeering conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962 and 1964 as well as civil conspiracy. Because all of the Nigro defendants' alleged misconduct involved Mr. Nigro's activities as a special master, I determined that he was acting in a quasi-judicial capacity and that he and the law firm were therefore immune from liability.

The Nigro defendants have now moved for the entry of judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b) (Docket # 105) which motion plaintiff opposes on the grounds that the decision is "not sufficiently 'final'" and "the particular circumstance of this case preclude a finding that 'there is no just reason for delay.'" (Docket # 109.)

The allowance of the motion to dismiss is a ruling that fully disposes of all claims asserted against the Nigro defendants. Plaintiff correctly points out that the counts in which the Nigro defendants are charged also name other defendants. However, the continued presence of those defendants in no way affects the finality of the dismissal of Nigro and the law firm.

Lawyers, to maintain their practice, must zealously guard their reputations. The pendency of RICO and conspiracy charges based on a lawyer's professional work raises serious questions about the lawyer's good name. The damage is exacerbated when the accusations arise in the context of the lawyer's work as a master appointed by the court. Any delay in the entry of judgment harms the Nigro defendants and provides no benefit to the other parties or, for that matter to the court and the speedy disposition of the remaining claims.

The motion for the entry of judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 54 (b) is ALLOWED.

______________________

RYA W. ZOBEL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Nystedt v. Munroe

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Jan 26, 2012
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-10754-RWZ (D. Mass. Jan. 26, 2012)
Case details for

Nystedt v. Munroe

Case Details

Full title:DOUGLAS O. NYSTEDT, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Date published: Jan 26, 2012

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-10754-RWZ (D. Mass. Jan. 26, 2012)

Citing Cases

Nystedt v. Nigro

The district court then certified its order of dismissal as a final judgment. See Nystedt v. Munroe, No.…