Evelyn Rivera v. Jimmy Ducharme and Ducharme Construction Management, LLC

2021 DNH 163

• Court: District Court, D. New Hampshire
• Decided: October 13, 2021
• Docket: 21-cv-221-PB
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Evelyn Rivera Case No. 21-cv-221-PB v. Opinion No. 2021 DNH 163

Jimmy Ducharme and Ducharme Construction Management, LLC

ORDER

In this property dispute between two neighbors, defendant

Jimmy Ducharme has asserted counterclaims against plaintiff

Evelyn Rivera for (1) trespass to land, (2) ejectment, (3)

conversion, and (4) unjust enrichment. Doc. No. 12 ¶¶ 14-37.

Before the court is Ducharme’s request for a preliminary

judgment forbidding the plaintiff, her family, her tenants, or

anyone under her control from parking cars in the area between

his and her residential buildings located on Summer Street in

Nashua, New Hampshire. Doc. No. 15 ¶ 1. Ducharme also asks

that Rivera be enjoined from parking cars or being physically

present anywhere else on his property. Id. ¶¶ 2-4.

A preliminary injunction is “an ‘extraordinary and drastic

remedy’ that ‘is never awarded as of right.’” Voice of the Arab

World, Inc. v. MDTV Med. News Now, Inc., 645 F.3d 26, 32 (1st

Cir. 2011) (quoting Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674, 689-90

(2008)). A party seeking a preliminary injunction must show that: (1) he is likely to succeed on the merits of his claim;

(2) he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of

preliminary relief; (3) the balance of equities is in his favor;

and (4) injunctive relief is in the public interest. March v.

Mills, 867 F.3d 46, 52 (1st Cir. 2017). Likelihood of success

on the merits is the most important factor. Norris ex rel. A.M.

v. Cape Elizabeth Sch. Dist., 969 F.3d 12, 22 (1st Cir. 2020).

“To demonstrate likelihood of success on the merits, [the party]

must show more than mere possibility of success — rather, [he]

must establish a strong likelihood that [he] will ultimately

prevail.” Sindicato Puertorriqueño de Trabajadores v. Fortuño,

699 F.3d 1, 10 (1st Cir. 2012) (per curiam) (cleaned up).

For the reasons I fully outlined during the hearing held on

October 12, 2021, I find that Ducharme has demonstrated a

likelihood of success on the merits of his claims that Rivera is

using his property for parking vehicles without any legal right

to do so. I also find that his property rights will continue to

be harmed absent a preliminary injunction, that the balance of

equities is neutral, and that the public interest is best served

when property owners are able to make use of their property.

As such, I partially grant Ducharme’s motion for

preliminary injunctive relief as follows: Rivera, her family,

her tenants, and all other persons under her control must not

2 park any vehicle in the area between the Rivera building and the

Ducharme building.

SO ORDERED.

/s/ Paul J. Barbadoro Paul J. Barbadoro United States District Judge

October 13, 2021

cc: Counsel of record