Town of Dedham v. Abrams

Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div.

Town of Dedham v. Abrams

1990 Mass. App. Div. 53, 1990 Mass. App. Div. LEXIS 26

CourtMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

DecidedApril 2, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 1990 Mass. App. Div. 53 (Town of Dedham v. Abrams) 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

Town of Dedham v. Abrams, 1990 Mass. App. Div. 53, 1990 Mass. App. Div. LEXIS 26 (Mass. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Dolan, J.

Appellant was found responsible for a civil motor vehicle infraction by a clerk-magistrate. He appealed that decision to a justice for a de novo hearing in accordance with the provisions of G.L. c. 90C §3. Appellant did not appear atthe time of his scheduled hearing before ajustice, afinding of responsible was entered, and an assessment imposed. He then appealed to this division.

In the case of civil motor vehicle infractions, appeals to this division are on matters of law arising from the decision of a justice. The trial justice made no error of law when an assessment was imposed for a civil motor vehicle infraction after appellant failed to appear at the scheduled hearing.

Appellant argues that he had good cause for failing to appear at that hearing. However, he has misconstrued his remedy. His remedy, if any, is to ask a trial justice to allow Mm to remove his default, upon such terms as are just, in order that he may contest the violation.

This matter is remanded to Dedham District Court for a trial justice to determine if appellant should be allowed to remove his default and contest the violation. So ordered.

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

Dolan, J.

Appellant was found responsible for a civil motor vehicle infraction by a clerk-magistrate. He appealed that decision to a justice for a de novo hearing in accordance with the provisions of G.L. c. 90C §3. Appellant did not appear atthe time of his scheduled hearing before ajustice, afinding of responsible was entered, and an assessment imposed. He then appealed to this division.

In the case of civil motor vehicle infractions, appeals to this division are on matters of law arising from the decision of a justice. The trial justice made no error of law when an assessment was imposed for a civil motor vehicle infraction after appellant failed to appear at the scheduled hearing.

Appellant argues that he had good cause for failing to appear at that hearing. However, he has misconstrued his remedy. His remedy, if any, is to ask a trial justice to allow Mm to remove his default, upon such terms as are just, in order that he may contest the violation.

This matter is remanded to Dedham District Court for a trial justice to determine if appellant should be allowed to remove his default and contest the violation. So ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1990 Mass. App. Div. 53, 1990 Mass. App. Div. LEXIS 26, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/town-of-dedham-v-abrams-massdistctapp-1990.