Robinson v. Commissioner of Department of Youth Services

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Robinson v. Commissioner of Department of Youth Services

384 N.E.2d 1253, 7 Mass. App. Ct. 847

Massachusetts Appeals Court·Decided January 23, 1979·Published

Opinion

Since the appellant has not shown good cause for his failure to pay the docket fee within the time prescribed by Mass.R.A.P. 10(a), as amended, 367 Mass. 919 (1975), or the existence of a meritorious appeal, we affirm the order of the single justice denying the appellant’s motion to docket his appeal late. See Vyskocil v. Vyskocil, 376 Mass. 137, 139-140 (1978); Tisei v. Building Inspector of Marlborough, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 377, 379 (1975); Westinghouse Elec. Supply Co. v. Healy Corp., 5 Mass. App. Ct. 43, 57-62 (1977).

So ordered.

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

Since the appellant has not shown good cause for his failure to pay the docket fee within the time prescribed by Mass.R.A.P. 10(a), as amended, 367 Mass. 919 (1975), or the existence of a meritorious appeal, we affirm the order of the single justice denying the appellant’s motion to docket his appeal late. See Vyskocil v. Vyskocil, 376 Mass. 137, 139-140 (1978); Tisei v. Building Inspector of Marlborough, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 377, 379 (1975); Westinghouse Elec. Supply Co. v. Healy Corp., 5 Mass. App. Ct. 43, 57-62 (1977).

So ordered.

Robinson v. Commissioner of Department of Youth Services, 384 N.E.2d 1253, 7 Mass. App. Ct. 847 (Mass. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

384 N.E.2d 1253 (Robinson v. Commissioner of Department of Youth Services) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related