World

Boston Water and Sewer HR director ordered by Suffolk Superior jury to pay $72K in mortgage stiff case

A Suffolk Superior Court jury returned a verdict against the Boston Water and Sewer Commission’s embattled human resources director Marie Theodat, and ordered her to pay $72,000 to the woman she stiffed on a $75,000 mortgage loan.

The verdict, handed down Tuesday, concludes a nearly weeklong trial for this lawsuit filed against Theodat in 2020, but is far from the end of the road for the Commission’s recently promoted top human resources executive, who is embroiled in two other civil lawsuits that include fraud allegations.

In this instance, the jury opted to order Theodat to pay less than the original $75,000 mortgage loan she borrowed from the plaintiff, Gertha Pierre, due to Pierre’s testimony that Theodat made a $3,000 payment a month after she took out the loan, in March 2016.

Theodat defaulted on the loan that same month, forming the basis of the complaint, which contended that she never paid it back, despite signing a promissory note. The jury agreed, ruling in favor of Pierre for the entirety of the loan, excluding the prior $3,000 payment the plaintiff had attested to during the trial.

“The verdict was clearly justified by the evidence,” William Spallina, a Boston-based attorney who represented Pierre in the case, told the Herald. “We appreciate the effort the jury made, reaching a verdict.”

Michael Keohane, another attorney representing Pierre, told the Herald last month that the lack of repayment for the $75,000 loan had made things hard for his client, “who hoped to use that money for investment purposes.”

“She was out that money, which was a considerable amount, plus the anticipated return that she had,” Keohane said at the time.

Theodat’s attorney Jeanette Marie Lucey did not respond to a request for comment.

Theodat was also the subject of a cross-claim from Ernst Guerrier, a prior co-defendant that sought to make her responsible for the $30,000 payment he made to Pierre as a settlement for his alleged involvement in the matter.

As the attorney who helped Pierre secure the loan, Guerrier was previously facing malpractice allegations for withholding pertinent information from Pierre that may have made her think twice about making the $75,000 mortgage loan, according to the complaint.

Anthony Ellison, a Dorchester-based attorney who represented Guerrier in the case, said there was no malpractice nor fault on the part of his client, who negotiated a settlement amount with Pierre, to help reimburse her for some of the funds she had been stiffed on by Theodat.

For that, his client was seeking restitution from Theodat, he said. The jury disagreed, ruling against the cross-claim.

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button