By Adam Swift
The eminent domain lawsuit filed by the former owners of the 33-acre Wonderland site is scheduled to begin in September of next year.
At a Suffolk Superior Court hearing on May 14, the city requested a delay in the start of the trial as the city brought additional legal counsel on board to assist with the case.
Peter Flynn of Flynn Law, which is representing the former owners of the property, CBW Lending, LLC, has expressed frustration at the delay of the trial and what he characterized as the city dragging its feet in sitting down to come to a settlement in the case.
The city paid $29.5 million for the Wonderland property in 2022 for use as the site of the new Revere High School, as well as potential commercial development.
In early 2023, CBW Lending filed its lawsuit in order to obtain what it calls a fair price for the property. Flynn said the former owners have not questioned the taking of the property, only the fact that the city paid a severely undervalued price.
Flynn has stated that the actual value of the land is closer to the $100 million range. Over the past year, Flynn and attorney John Scopa have been working to determine the true value of the property as of the November, 2022 taking date.
Flynn has said the biggest difficulty in the case has been the difficulty in sitting down with city officials and their legal counsel in order to reach a settlement. At the May 14 court hearing, Flynn said he was surprised to hear that attorney John Leonard, who is providing counsel for the city in the case, was considering retirement and that Revere had brought on the firm of Foley Hoag to assist with the case.
In a statement, Mayor Patrick Keefe’s office said that the city currently has no comment about the status of the lawsuit.
“At its inception, the City retained the services of Attorney John S. Leonard as outside counsel to defend the City,” the statement continued. “John is one of the state’s premiere eminent domain attorneys with over 60 years of experience defending cities and towns. To support John, the City recently added the services of the law firm Foley Hoag to assist with the litigation.
“The trial is expected to begin sometime in September 2026,” the mayor’s office continued. “We understand this to be the largest eminent domain case in Massachusetts’ history, so the City is obligated to its residents to expend all necessary resources to defend taxpayer dollars.”
Flynn said that as early as 2023, his law office was trying to convince the City’s counsel that the matter could be resolved by opening lines of communication, and sharing information and documents.
In February of this year, Flynn said the plaintiff’s counsel reiterated that defense counsel and their experts could present to anyone representing the city, but were under no obligation to provide any information or documents supporting the City’s valuation opinions or refuting those of CBW. Flynn said he and Scopa and their primary valuation expert,made a two-hour presentation to the City with visual aids, plans, zoning data, and sales data laying out the entire case and addressing every issue involved.
“This was an extraordinary display of good faith and the desire to move the case with great judicial economy,” Flynn said. “The City’s special eminent domain counsel, John Leonard, City Solicitor, and the City appraiser attended the meeting and watched the presentation.
The City appraiser, Mr. Coleman, photographed every slide presented.”
Flynn stated that the city is fully aware already of virtually every factual argument and legal argument the plaintiffs were and are making. “Rather than use this meeting as the genesis for settlement discussions, the City’s representatives treated it as free discovery, presented not a scintilla of schematics, documents, plans, photos, or opinions of any kind, and simply walked out the door,” Flynn said.
Flynn stated that if the city is looking out for the taxpayers of Revere,
It has been in a position for 2-½ years to engage any necessary experts to address any and all claims of the plaintiff and also to respond to countless inquiries relative to settlement.
“Similarly, if the City truly intended to reduce the witness list, it would have responded to the plaintiff’s repeated suggestions that many issues affecting value were not in dispute and, such, certain experts could be eliminated on both sides,” Flynn stated. “The CBW clients made abundantly clear what issues, topics, and opinions it will present at trial, and the City has done nothing to narrow the issues or make any offers of settlement.”
