The appeals panel considered a commercial-summary-process dispute in which the defendant/appellant argued the trial court erred by entering a broad judgment after a limited motion and a later reconsideration.

Jeff Lindquist, counsel for Ray Street Properties LLC and David White, told the court the trial judge first denied summary judgment because genuine issues of material fact existed, then later on reconsideration granted broader relief without new evidence. Lindquist urged reversal and remand, calling the judgment the product of "compounding procedural and substantive errors" and contending three of four claims lacked evidentiary support.

Justices pressed Lindquist on whether the trial judge may reconsider a prior denial and what new information—if any—was provided. The court discussed record gaps: whether affidavits were filed, whether deposition testimony supported actual notice, and whether statutory amendments to the summary-process statute required a specific publication identification for auction advertising.

Plaintiff Mr. Scott argued defendants failed to comply with statutory posting and mailing requirements, that claimed mailed notices were not produced in discovery (23 letters referenced but not produced), and that statutory conversion and chapter 93A remedies flowed from statutory noncompliance. The panel asked about the sufficiency of evidence on actual notice and whether an execution issued prematurely.

The court took the matter under submission after extended argument.