Case Results
M.W. vs. J.L. – Barnstable District Court
HARASSMENT ORDER: VACATED
In 2006, Plaintiff and his business partner formed several Florida entities for the purpose of buying, syndicating and managing a multi-million dollar commercial office building in Miami (referred to as “Property.”) In connection with buying the Property, Plaintiff issued a private (unregistered) securities offering a tenant-in-common (TIC) interests to 27 investors. 95% of the TIC owners are elderly and used their retirement monies to buy TIC interests in the Property based on the representations of Plaintiff made in the offering documents. Plaintiff’s offering promised the TIC investors fractional ownership in the Property as well as the right to receive distributions of the Property’s income. In 2007, Defendant paid $2 million to invest in the Property and became the largest of all TIC owners with an 18.67% TIC interest in the Property. Plaintiff controlled the Property’s bank accounts and handled all aspects of the Property’s financial management, including what was disclosed to the TIC’s. By the end of 2010, most of the TIC owners, including Defendant, became suspicious of Plaintiff’s management of the Property. On December 31, 2010, the TIC’s terminated Plaintiff. By March 2011, the Property was delinquent on its mortgage, owing more than $453,000 and the Property was on the verge of foreclosure. In April 2011, another company began managing the property.
The TIC’s and Defendant retained an Attorney to investigate the Plaintiff. The Law Firm demanded production of information and cooperation from Plaintiff. In response to the Law Firm’s demands, Plaintiff’s attorney claimed that Defendant and another TIC owner were “making threats” against Plaintiff. Through its investigation, the Law Firm discovered that Plaintiff stole from the Property’s bank accounts and rents and defrauded the TIC’s in several ways that were designed to conceal the nature of the payments.
On June 24, 2014, Plaintiff obtained a Harassment Order against the Defendant alleging that the Defendant had threatened him numerous times. Specifically, Defendant sent him a threatening letter via mail, sent him many threatening e-mails, threatened him with bodily harm on the telephone, and publically defamed and slandered him on the internet. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was hired to represent the Defendant and after a hearing the Harassment Order was vacated. Attorney Noonan established that Plaintiff’s harassment order was sought as part of an ulterior motive, such as retaliation against the Defendant, to deflect his own civil and criminal liability in the five ongoing lawsuits, to poison the ongoing civil suits against him, or to gain some sort of tactical advantage against Defendant in the civil lawsuits.
Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets Harassment Order vacated against businessman.
Commonwealth v. R.K. – Plymouth District Court
VIOLATION OF 209A: DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING
Defendant’s wife took out an abuse prevention order against him stemming from an incident where the Defendant threatened his wife in the presence of their children. The 209A Order contained a provision prohibiting the Defendant from abusing his wife and from contacting his wife. Defendant was charged with violating the order by sending his wife an e-mail. At the Clerk’s Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued that the Defendant did not receive full notice of restraining order because the police had not served it a copy upon him yet – but rather read the terms of the order to him over the phone. Attorney Noonan argued that the Defendant did not have actual knowledge that the order contained a “no-contact” provision – but the Defendant’s understanding was that the order was to refrain from abuse.
Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan persuades clerk-magistrate not to issue Violation of Restraining Order charge against his client.
Commonwealth v. M.R. – Taunton District Court
NEGLIGENT OPERATION: DISMISSED upon MOTION
Client was charged with Negligent Operation stemming from an incident on August 14, 2014 in which a State Trooper observed his Mustang and another vehicle (Toyota) traveling northbound on Route 495. While the two vehicles were traveling on this major highway, the passenger in the Mustang and the operator of the Toyota were attempting to pass an object (business card) between the two vehicles by traveling side-by-side and having the parties reach their hands out the window. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued a Motion to Dismiss arguing that his client was entitled to dismissal of the criminal complaint because he was denied the opportunity of having a hearing before the clerk-magistrate.
Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan’s Motion to Dismiss was allowed and the criminal complaint was dismissed upon court costs.
Commonwealth v. R.M. – Brockton District Court
THREATS TO COMMIT A & B: DISMISSED (CLERK’S HEARING)
Client, 37 year-old business owner, was charged with Threats to Commit a Crime stemming from allegations that he threatened to assault and beat an ex-employee and the ex-employee’s father. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan argued that this was a simple verbal argument over a paycheck. The Magistrate agreed with Attorney Noonan to keep the matter open for a period of 3 months and to dismiss the case at that time.
Result: No criminal complaint issued and the client was able to complete the process of trying to become a Massachusetts State Trooper.
Commonwealth v. E.N. – Brockton District Court
LARCENY OVER $250: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
Defendant, an 18-year-old with no criminal record, was charged with Larceny over $250 (felony) stemming from allegations that he stole an iPhone valued at over $250. Defendant was a freshman at the University of Maine and a walk-on player on the football team. Defendant is an aspiring civil engineer.
Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan dismissed the criminal complaint prior to arraignment saving his client from having a felony charge on his record.
Commonwealth v. R.M. – Taunton District Court
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT CRIME: DISMISSED
Police arrested three known drug dealers and obtained a search warrant to search the residence of the main drug dealer. Police discovered three cell phones in the residence, which were ringing non-stop and receiving text messages from potential drug buyers. Police answered the suspects’ phone and received requests to purchase drugs. Police arrested three individuals, including the Defendant, who made orders to purchase drugs on the telephone and arrived to the residence with money for the purchase. After Defendant’s arraignment, he retained Attorney Patrick J. Noonan.
Result: At his first court appearance, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuaded the Commonwealth to place his client on pretrial probation at the conclusion of which the criminal charge will be dismissed, and client avoids having to admit guilt.
Commonwealth v. N.S. – Wrentham District Court
LARCENY OVER $250: PRETRIAL PROBATION
TRESPASSING: NOT RESPONSIBLE
Client, 33 year-old warehouseman with no criminal record, was arrested and charged with Larceny over $250 (felony) and Trespassing stemming from an incident in which an identified caller reported that a person had stolen property from a National Grid. Police were dispatched to the scene and observed the Defendant tying the stolen materials to his roof-rack.
Result: On his first court appearance, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuades the Commonwealth to place his client on pretrial probation for six-months at the conclusion of which the charge will be dismissed and client avoids having to admit guilt. Client is found not responsible on the civil infraction of Trespassing.
Commonwealth v. K.T. – Brockton District Court
RECEIVE STOLEN PROPERTY: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
FORGERY OF CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
UTTERING FALSE CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
LARCENY BY CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
FORGERY OF CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
UTTERING FALSE CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
LARCENY BY CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
FORGERY OF CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
UTTERING FALSE CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT CRIME: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
Client, a 23 year-old woman with no criminal record, was alleged to have stolen several checks from her employer, a Real Estate Business. It was alleged that the Defendant then forged the stolen checks (making the checks payable to her and forging her employer’s signature). Defendant then cashed several of the forged checks at the bank and received payment from the bank. Defendant attempted to pass and cash another forged check, which the bank refused. The employer and the bank discovered the fraudulent transactions and contacted the police. Surveillance video from the bank showed the Defendant making these fraudulent transactions. In addition, the employer provided police with incriminating text messages sent to him from the defendant.
Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan dismisses 10 criminal charges (nine of which were felonies) prior to arraignment, saving his client from having 10 criminal charges on her record.