CONVENT MEWS ASSOCIATION INC v. JAMES BENSON (2010)

In his fourth ¹ plenary appeal seeking to abate permanent restraints imposed upon his interactions with plaintiff, a condominium association and its management, defendant seeks reversal of the Chancery Division's order dated December 4, 2009.   The order denied defendant's motion to vacate the restraints because defendant had failed to demonstrate a change in circumstances in fact or in law that would warrant such relief.

We incorporate by reference the facts and procedural chronology set forth in our prior opinions in this litigation.   Having fully reviewed defendant's present arguments, we are satisfied that they lack merit and do not warrant discussion in this written opinion.   R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E).   We decline, however, to impose the pre-filing restriction on future appeals requested by plaintiff.

Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

FN1. See Convent Mews Ass'n v. Benson, No. A-837-08 (App.Div. May 27, 2009);  Convent Mews Ass'n v. Benson, No. A-1785-07 (App.Div. Aug. 14, 2008);  Convent Mews Ass'n v. Benson, No. A-2097-06 (App.Div. July 24, 2007)..  FN1. See Convent Mews Ass'n v. Benson, No. A-837-08 (App.Div. May 27, 2009);  Convent Mews Ass'n v. Benson, No. A-1785-07 (App.Div. Aug. 14, 2008);  Convent Mews Ass'n v. Benson, No. A-2097-06 (App.Div. July 24, 2007).

PER CURIAM