Higgins v. Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Higgins v. Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n

97 N.E.3d 691, 479 Mass. 1037

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedMay 25, 2018

DocketSJC–12456

StatusPublished

This text of 97 N.E.3d 691 (Higgins v. Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Higgins v. Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n, 97 N.E.3d 691, 479 Mass. 1037 (Mass. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

RESCRIPT

The Federal National Mortgage Association (association) has moved to dismiss the appeal by John T. Higgins, Jr., from a judgment of the county court. In January, 2018, after the appeal was entered in this court, Higgins moved for leave to file a nonconforming brief. In response, we gave Higgins until March 2, 2018, to do so. Some six weeks after that date, Higgins had not filed any brief, and the association filed its motion. See Mass. R. A. P. 19 (c), 365 Mass. 867 (1974). Higgins has not filed any response to the motion to dismiss within the time allotted by Mass. R. A. P. 15 (a), 365 Mass. 859 (1974), nor has he filed a brief. The motion to dismiss is allowed. Although Higgins is appearing pro se, we hold him to the same standards in this regard as litigants represented by counsel. See, e.g., Rasheed v. Commonwealth, 440 Mass. 1027, 1027, 798 N.E.2d 1022 (2003) ; Solimine v. Davidian, 422 Mass. 1002, 1002, 661 N.E.2d 934 (1996).

Appeal dismissed.

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

RESCRIPT

The Federal National Mortgage Association (association) has moved to dismiss the appeal by John T. Higgins, Jr., from a judgment of the county court. In January, 2018, after the appeal was entered in this court, Higgins moved for leave to file a nonconforming brief. In response, we gave Higgins until March 2, 2018, to do so. Some six weeks after that date, Higgins had not filed any brief, and the association filed its motion. See Mass. R. A. P. 19 (c), 365 Mass. 867 (1974). Higgins has not filed any response to the motion to dismiss within the time allotted by Mass. R. A. P. 15 (a), 365 Mass. 859 (1974), nor has he filed a brief. The motion to dismiss is allowed. Although Higgins is appearing pro se, we hold him to the same standards in this regard as litigants represented by counsel. See, e.g., Rasheed v. Commonwealth, 440 Mass. 1027, 1027, 798 N.E.2d 1022 (2003) ; Solimine v. Davidian, 422 Mass. 1002, 1002, 661 N.E.2d 934 (1996).

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

97 N.E.3d 691, 479 Mass. 1037, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/higgins-v-fed-natl-mortg-assn-mass-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack