Holocaust Museum Boston | 125 Tremont Street | Downtown


That Holocaust Museum keeps becoming more and more "charming" as a neighbor with each passing day, doesn't it? Why couldn't they simply respond to the Orpheum's (Crossroad's) offer?

Instead, this is going to go to court. Seriously , eff them.
 
Last edited:
As of 9/7.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5876.JPG
    IMG_5876.JPG
    5.6 MB · Views: 126
  • IMG_5877.JPG
    IMG_5877.JPG
    5.2 MB · Views: 129
  • IMG_5878.JPG
    IMG_5878.JPG
    6.2 MB · Views: 127
  • IMG_5880.JPG
    IMG_5880.JPG
    5.7 MB · Views: 120
It feels like you could back a trailer down that alley; I'm not sure I understand the impeded access part of the lawsuit?
 
It feels like you could back a trailer down that alley; I'm not sure I understand the impeded access part of the lawsuit?
It seems like plenty of room for pedestrian access. Is the construction going to cover more of the street and they're getting ahead of that being a problem? I'm not seeing what the issue is here based on the photos though...
 
Also, aren't you legally supposed to block the side walk like that for pedestrian safety on jobs like this ?
 
i think to get a truck in and out they have to go over the curb and construction will block that space
 
Judge's ruling issued. TL;DR: "I'm not going to grant the Orpheum's request, though their claim of a traditional easement is very strong. Go home and settle this out of court as you should've done to begin with, thanks!"

"Both parties in this case have a lot at stake. However, the evidence submitted to the court suggests that they both can achieve their desired goals without the court’s imposition of an injunction that would undoubtedly be inadequate to coordinate the day-to-day operations of a major construction project with the running of a storied live music venue that holds shows on 40 to 50 nights a year. Although the court will not issue the injunction as requested by Crossroads, it must be emphasized that Crossroads will likely be able to prove at trial that it has an easement of passage over Hamilton Place that is wide enough to accommodate the large vehicles and the scores of patrons that have used the way each time the Orpheum Theatre has hosted an event in the past. The Foundation should respect that right going forward and follow through with the cooperation pledged by its President and CEO."
 
Judge's ruling issued. TL;DR: "I'm not going to grant the Orpheum's request, though their claim of a traditional easement is very strong. Go home and settle this out of court as you should've done to begin with, thanks!"

"Both parties in this case have a lot at stake. However, the evidence submitted to the court suggests that they both can achieve their desired goals without the court’s imposition of an injunction that would undoubtedly be inadequate to coordinate the day-to-day operations of a major construction project with the running of a storied live music venue that holds shows on 40 to 50 nights a year. Although the court will not issue the injunction as requested by Crossroads, it must be emphasized that Crossroads will likely be able to prove at trial that it has an easement of passage over Hamilton Place that is wide enough to accommodate the large vehicles and the scores of patrons that have used the way each time the Orpheum Theatre has hosted an event in the past. The Foundation should respect that right going forward and follow through with the cooperation pledged by its President and CEO."

Talk about a Friday afternoon judge passing the buck.

So he/she/they are not going to issue an injunction - - the museum folks may possibly build something that blocks access, the thing might actually go to trial (and gum up civic life even more, but hey, at least the lawyers get to bill!).

Sorry, Judge - - DO YOUR JOB, if you feel this is legally right then rule on it before it becomes something counterproductive to society.
 

Back
Top