Court decision almost too mulch to bear

The Supreme Judicial Court ruled today that a Concord company's First Amendment rights weren't violated just because its landlord tried to evict it for non-payment of rent while it was negotiating with the town over getting rid of "85,000 yards of unscreened compost material."

A. John Marabello began eviction proceedings against Boston Bark when it stopped paying rent in 2009.

Before Marabello moved to evict, Boston Bark was in the process of negotiating a plan with the town to do something about the mulch, which the town said posed a threat to nearby wetlands.

When the town threatened to begin fining Marabello $500 a day for failing to get Boston Bark to get rid of the stuff, he filed suit against the company.

The state's highest court ruled today that Marabello did nothing to interfere with Boston Bark's negotiations with the town and that therefore it had no claim under a state law designed to protect homeowners speaking their minds in public forums from giant corporations with large legal staffs trying to squelch dissent.

"The crux of the claim is that he was injured by Boston Bark's failure to remove the mulch," which is a perfectly valid reason to file a suit, the court said, adding the company failed to provide any evidence Marabello had at any point tried to interfere with its negotiations with the town.

At the same time, the court said that while it didn't buy Boston Bark's argument, that didn't mean its argument was frivolous enough to warrant the double damages Marabello wanted under a law barring frivolous court motions.

• Complete ruling, John Marabello Sr. vs. Boston Bark Corporation