Picciotto v. Appeals Court

457 Mass. 1001
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedJune 9, 2010
DocketNo. 1
StatusPublished

This text of 457 Mass. 1001 (Picciotto v. Appeals Court) 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
Picciotto v. Appeals Court, 457 Mass. 1001 (Mass. 2010).

Opinion

Stefano, Judith, and Melita Picciotto jointly filed three petitions in the county court for relief in the nature of certiorari, G. L. c. 249, § 4, challenging a decision of the Appeals Court that was adverse to them. See Zabin v. Picciotto, 73 Mass. App. Ct. 141 (2008), further appellate review denied, 453 Mass. 1103, 1105 (2009). Shortly after they filed their petitions, they moved that a particular Justice of this court recuse herself from considering the petitions. She denied their requests. The Picciottos filed notices of appeal from the orders of denial. Later, a different single justice decided the Picciot-tos’ petitions on the merits, denying them.

The appeals at bar concern only the orders denying the Picciottos’ requests that the first single justice recuse herself. Those orders were interlocutory at the time the Picciottos pursued their appeals because no final judgment had yet entered on the petitions. There is no right of interlocutory appeal from such orders. The Picciottos could have challenged the orders in appeals from the final judgments on their petitions. See Bloise v. Bloise, 437 Mass. 1010, 1010 (2002), citing Doten v. Plymouth Div. of the Probate & Family Court Dep’t, 395 Mass. 1001 (1985). See also Picciotto v. Chief Justice of the Superior Court, 446 Mass. 1015, 1016 (2006). Where there is no authority for such interlocutory appeals, they must be dismissed. In any event, any concerns the Picciottos had about the involvement of the first single justice in their petitions should have disappeared where the first single justice made no procedural or substantive rulings on the petitions, and where the petitions were decided by a different single justice.2

Appeals dismissed.

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

Related

Doten v. Plymouth Division of the Probate & Family Court Department
479 N.E.2d 130 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1985)
Bloise v. Bloise
770 N.E.2d 472 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2002)
Picciotto v. Chief Justice of the Superior Court
446 Mass. 1015 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2006)
Zabin v. Picciotto
896 N.E.2d 937 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
457 Mass. 1001, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/picciotto-v-appeals-court-mass-2010.