Fennick v. Kittredge

953 N.E.2d 187, 460 Mass. 1012, 2011 Mass. LEXIS 837
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided September 21, 2011·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Kevin Fennick appeals from a judgment of a single justice of this court denying his petition under G. L. c. 211, § 3, in which he sought relief from one or more orders of the Superior Court. The single justice correctly denied extraordinary relief, as Fennick had an adequate remedy in the ordinary appellate process, namely, a direct appeal to the Appeals Court from any final judgment. “Our general superintendence power under G. L. c. 211, § 3, is extraordinary and to be exercised sparingly, not as a substitute for the normal appellate process or merely to provide an additional layer of appellate review after the normal process has run its course.” Votta v. Police Dep’t of Billerica, 444 Mass. 1001, 1001 (2005).

Judgment affirmed.

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

Fennick v. Kittredge, 953 N.E.2d 187, 460 Mass. 1012, 2011 Mass. LEXIS 837 (Mass. 2011).

953 N.E.2d 187 (Fennick v. Kittredge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ardaneh v. Commonwealth
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2023
Yahya v. Rocktop Partners I, LP.
97 N.E.3d 689 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2018)
Abernathy v. Commonwealth
97 N.E.3d 687 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2018)
Bishay v. Land Court Department of the Trial Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2017
Ainooson v. Department of Correction
49 N.E.3d 244 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2016)
Fennick v. Kittredge
959 N.E.2d 433 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2011)