Stevenson v. Brandeis University

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Stevenson v. Brandeis University

659 N.E.2d 1168, 421 Mass. 1009, 1996 Mass. LEXIS 8

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedJanuary 11, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 659 N.E.2d 1168 (Stevenson v. Brandeis University) 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

Stevenson v. Brandeis University, 659 N.E.2d 1168, 421 Mass. 1009, 1996 Mass. LEXIS 8 (Mass. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Supreme Judicial Court Rule 2:21 (2), post 1303 (1995), concerning an appeal from a single justice’s denial of relief from an interlocutory ruling in the trial court, requires an appellant’s memorandum to “set forth the reasons why review of the trial court decision cannot adequately be obtained on appeal from any final adverse judgment in the trial court or by other available means.” The appellant has failed to set forth reasons why relief after a successful appeal from any adverse final judgment in this case will not be adequate. Moreover, the appeal, insofar as it relies on G. L. c. 231, § 118 (1994 ed.), is subject to the same jurisdictional defect as existed in Ashford v. Massachusetts Bay Transp. Auth., ante 563 (1995).

Judgment affirmed.

Sanford A. Kowal for the plaintiff. Lisa J. Damon & Lisa Stephanian Burton for the defendants.

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

Supreme Judicial Court Rule 2:21 (2), post 1303 (1995), concerning an appeal from a single justice’s denial of relief from an interlocutory ruling in the trial court, requires an appellant’s memorandum to “set forth the reasons why review of the trial court decision cannot adequately be obtained on appeal from any final adverse judgment in the trial court or by other available means.” The appellant has failed to set forth reasons why relief after a successful appeal from any adverse final judgment in this case will not be adequate. Moreover, the appeal, insofar as it relies on G. L. c. 231, § 118 (1994 ed.), is subject to the same jurisdictional defect as existed in Ashford v. Massachusetts Bay Transp. Auth., ante 563 (1995).

Judgment affirmed.

Sanford A. Kowal for the plaintiff. Lisa J. Damon & Lisa Stephanian Burton for the defendants.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

659 N.E.2d 1168, 421 Mass. 1009, 1996 Mass. LEXIS 8, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stevenson-v-brandeis-university-mass-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack