O'Hearn v. Carpenter

Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div.

O'Hearn v. Carpenter

1996 Mass. App. Div. 116

CourtMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

DecidedJune 24, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 1996 Mass. App. Div. 116 (O'Hearn v. Carpenter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

O'Hearn v. Carpenter, 1996 Mass. App. Div. 116 (Mass. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Aguiar, J.

This is a petition to extend time for filing an appeal under Rule 14 of the District Municipal Appellate Division Appeal Rules.

The issue of whether there was excusable neglect is a factual one. By denying plaintiff’s motion to extend time, the trial judge decided against the plaintiff.

This should not he overturned by the Appellate Division unless there was an abuse of discretion by the trier of fact. This was not the case.

The petition is denied.

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

Aguiar, J.

This is a petition to extend time for filing an appeal under Rule 14 of the District Municipal Appellate Division Appeal Rules.

The issue of whether there was excusable neglect is a factual one. By denying plaintiff’s motion to extend time, the trial judge decided against the plaintiff.

This should not he overturned by the Appellate Division unless there was an abuse of discretion by the trier of fact. This was not the case.

The petition is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1996 Mass. App. Div. 116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ohearn-v-carpenter-massdistctapp-1996.