Rosenthal v. Colonna

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Rosenthal v. Colonna

664 N.E.2d 1195, 422 Mass. 1013, 1996 Mass. LEXIS 122

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedMay 20, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 664 N.E.2d 1195 (Rosenthal v. Colonna) 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

Rosenthal v. Colonna, 664 N.E.2d 1195, 422 Mass. 1013, 1996 Mass. LEXIS 122 (Mass. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

A single justice of this court denied the plaintiff relief from an order of the Appellate Division of the District Court, Southern District, denying her motion to transfer her case to the Appellate Division, Northern District. G. L. c. 211, § 3 (1994 ed.). The defendant asserts that this matter is not within S.J.C. Rule 2:21, 421 Mass. 1303 (1995), because the plaintiff is not seeking interlocutory relief from a ruling of a trial court. We agree with the defendant that rule 2:21 is inapplicable. Although the appeal is not within rule 2:21, we have considered this appeal and conclude that it is without merit. The plaintiff brought her complaint in the Brookline District Court in Norfolk County. That court is in the Appellate Division, Southern [1014]*1014District. G. L. c. 231, § 108 (1994 ed.). There was no error of law or abuse of discretion in denying the request for transfer.

Despina Kyriakidis for the defendant. Maria Rosenthal, pro se.

Judgment affirmed.

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

A single justice of this court denied the plaintiff relief from an order of the Appellate Division of the District Court, Southern District, denying her motion to transfer her case to the Appellate Division, Northern District. G. L. c. 211, § 3 (1994 ed.). The defendant asserts that this matter is not within S.J.C. Rule 2:21, 421 Mass. 1303 (1995), because the plaintiff is not seeking interlocutory relief from a ruling of a trial court. We agree with the defendant that rule 2:21 is inapplicable. Although the appeal is not within rule 2:21, we have considered this appeal and conclude that it is without merit. The plaintiff brought her complaint in the Brookline District Court in Norfolk County. That court is in the Appellate Division, Southern [1014]*1014District. G. L. c. 231, § 108 (1994 ed.). There was no error of law or abuse of discretion in denying the request for transfer.

Despina Kyriakidis for the defendant. Maria Rosenthal, pro se.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

664 N.E.2d 1195, 422 Mass. 1013, 1996 Mass. LEXIS 122, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosenthal-v-colonna-mass-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack