Kornatowski v. Family Mutual Savings Bank

388 Mass. 1011
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided March 15, 1983·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

The plaintiff appeals from the denial of a petition treated under G. L. c. 211, § 3.1 We affirm the denial of the petition. “We exercise our powers under G. L. c. 211, § 3, sparingly, to prevent irreparable loss of significant rights when the normal course of trial and appeal will not provide adequate protection, or to resolve pressing, recurrent issues of proper administration of justice.” Hadfield v. Commonwealth, 387 Mass. 252, 255 n.2 (1982).

Treating this matter as an appeal from the Superior Court, there was no error in the dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint. In his papers, the plaintiff alleges fraud, misconduct, and bad faith by the defendant, resulting in a lost sale of his property. The papers are long, prolix, and rambling. The papers do not contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Mass. R. Civ. P. 8 (a) (1), 365 Mass. 749 (1974). “A pro se litigant is bound by the same rules of procedure as litigants with counsel.” International Fidelity Ins. Co. v. Wilson, 387 Mass. 841, 847 (1983).

Assuming, without deciding, that we may read the complaint as alleging fault and fraud on the part of the defendant because it did not permit the plaintiff’s mortgage to be assumed by a new buyer, there is no error. Due-on-sale clauses are valid.2 See Dunham v. Ware Sav. Bank, 384 Mass. 63 (1981).

The order of the single justice dismissing the plaintiff’s petition is affirmed. The judgment of the Superior Court dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint is affirmed.

So ordered.

Footnotes

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

Kornatowski v. Family Mutual Savings Bank, 388 Mass. 1011 (Mass. 1983).

388 Mass. 1011 (Kornatowski v. Family Mutual Savings Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Household Finance Corp. v. Koutrouba
1990 Mass. App. Div. 92 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1990)
Lewandowski v. Borghi
1989 Mass. App. Div. 80 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1989)
Woods v. Director of the Division of Employment Security
1988 Mass. App. Div. 93 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1988)
Kansky v. Harrison
1985 Mass. App. Div. 200 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1985)
Mmoe v. Commonwealth
473 N.E.2d 169 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1985)