Erickson v. Somers

846 N.E.2d 1125, 446 Mass. 1015, 2006 Mass. LEXIS 122
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided April 21, 2006·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The petitioner, Heidi K. Erickson, appeals from a judgment of a single justice of this court denying her petition under G. L. c. 211, § 3, and from the denial of her subsequent motion for a stay or other injunctive relief. We affirm.

The petition sought relief from a decision of a judge of the Superior Court declining to waive an appeal bond in connection with an appeal from a summary process judgment in the District Court, pursuant to G. L. c. 239, § 5. As we said in Matter of an Appeal Bond (No. 1), 428 Mass. 1013 (1998):

“The single justice of this court correctly denied the c. 211, § 3, petition because the petitioner had an adequate alternative remedy. The proper course for her to have followed, if she wished further to challenge the bond, was to refuse to pay the bond, suffer the dismissal of her summary process appeal, and then appeal to the Appeals Court (on the limited bond issue) from the order of dismissal.”

Id., citing Ford v. Braman, 30 Mass. App. Ct. 968, 970 (1991). See Tamber v. Desrochers, 45 Mass. App. Ct. 234 (1998); Home Sav. Bank v. Camillo, 45 Mass. App. Ct. 910 (1998).

We express no view on the merits of the petitioner’s claims concerning either the appeal bond or the summary process judgment.2

Judgment affirmed.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Erickson v. Somers, 846 N.E.2d 1125, 446 Mass. 1015, 2006 Mass. LEXIS 122 (Mass. 2006).

846 N.E.2d 1125 (Erickson v. Somers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wallace v. PNC Bank, N.A.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2018