Dean Pinelli v. Thomas Mercurio Elena Massarone v. Dean Pinelli Dean Pinelli v. Thomas Mercurio

Syllabus

In No. 2021-303-A and No. 2021-331-A, the defendants, Thomas Mercurio and John Mercurio, appealed pro se from a Superior Court order granting the plaintiffs', Dean Pinelli and Melissa Pinelli, motion to adjudge the Mercurios in civil contempt. Similarly, in No. 2021-330-A, the plaintiff, Elena Massarone, appealed pro se from an identical Superior Court order granting the Pinellis' motion to adjudge Elena in civil contempt. Following oral argument, the Supreme Court determined that these appeals should be consolidated. On appeal, Elena and the Mercurios asserted largely identical claims of error by the trial justice.<br><br>The Supreme Court concluded that its review of the appealed orders was limited to the orders themselves because Elena and the Mercurios failed to provide transcripts from any of the relevant hearings. The Supreme Court held that, in light of the findings made by the trial justice, the orders adjudging Elena and the Mercurios in contempt were well-balanced and judicious. Additionally, the Supreme Court noted that, although Elena, Thomas, and John each filed statements pursuant to Article I, Rule 12A of the Supreme Court Rules of Appellate Procedure identifying several claims of error on the part of the trial justice, the statements failed to provide any cogent legal analysis or substantive discussion of their claims. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the orders of the Superior Court.<br>