Hightower v. Commonwealth

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Hightower v. Commonwealth

921 N.E.2d 536, 456 Mass. 1003, 2010 Mass. LEXIS 29

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedFebruary 12, 2010

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 921 N.E.2d 536 (Hightower v. Commonwealth) 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

Hightower v. Commonwealth, 921 N.E.2d 536, 456 Mass. 1003, 2010 Mass. LEXIS 29 (Mass. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

The petitioner, Dwight Hightower, appeals from a judgment of a single justice of this court denying his petition pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3. We affirm.

Hightower filed his petition in the county court after a judge in the underlying case in the trial court allowed the Commonwealth’s motion for the production of medical records from the emergency room of a hospital where High-tower was treated after he was allegedly involved in a motor vehicle accident. The single justice denied his petition, and Hightower has filed what appears to be a memorandum pursuant to S.J.C. Rule 2:21, as amended, 434 Mass. 1301 (2001). For any of the following reasons, we can affirm the decision of the single justice. First, Hightower failed timely to file his mie 2:21 memorandum. S.J.C. Rule 2:21 (2). Second, Hightower has not demonstrated that the alleged error cannot be remedied in the ordinary course of appeal from any adverse judgment against him. Third, the record before the single justice does not sufficiently lay a foundation for the exclusion of Hightower’s records pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 290dd-2 (2006). Fourth, this case does not present the type of exceptional circumstances that warrant the exercise of this court’s extraordinary power of general superintendence. See Commonwealth v. Narea, 454 Mass. 1003, 1004 n.l (2009).

Judgment affirmed.

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

The petitioner, Dwight Hightower, appeals from a judgment of a single justice of this court denying his petition pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3. We affirm.

Hightower filed his petition in the county court after a judge in the underlying case in the trial court allowed the Commonwealth’s motion for the production of medical records from the emergency room of a hospital where High-tower was treated after he was allegedly involved in a motor vehicle accident. The single justice denied his petition, and Hightower has filed what appears to be a memorandum pursuant to S.J.C. Rule 2:21, as amended, 434 Mass. 1301 (2001). For any of the following reasons, we can affirm the decision of the single justice. First, Hightower failed timely to file his mie 2:21 memorandum. S.J.C. Rule 2:21 (2). Second, Hightower has not demonstrated that the alleged error cannot be remedied in the ordinary course of appeal from any adverse judgment against him. Third, the record before the single justice does not sufficiently lay a foundation for the exclusion of Hightower’s records pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 290dd-2 (2006). Fourth, this case does not present the type of exceptional circumstances that warrant the exercise of this court’s extraordinary power of general superintendence. See Commonwealth v. Narea, 454 Mass. 1003, 1004 n.l (2009).

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

921 N.E.2d 536, 456 Mass. 1003, 2010 Mass. LEXIS 29, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hightower-v-commonwealth-mass-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack