V & B Invs. v. Kracher

• Decision Date: 07 November 2016
• Docket Number: No. 16–P–51.,16–P–51.
• Citation: 63 N.E.3d 64 (Table),90 Mass.App.Ct. 1115
• Court: Appeals Court of Massachusetts
• Parties: V & B INVESTMENTS v. Matthew KRACHER.

90 Mass.App.Ct. 1115

63 N.E.3d 64 (Table)

V & B INVESTMENTS

v.Matthew KRACHER.

No. 16–P–51.

Appeals Court of Massachusetts.

November 7, 2016.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28

The defendant, Matthew Kracher, appeals from a judgment of the Housing Court awarding possession of certain leased premises to the plaintiff, V & B Investments. We affirm.

We first note that neither party has provided a record of the proceedings below aside from a transcript of the very brief trial, a copy of the Housing Court docket, and copies of two posttrial judgments.² Noticeably missing from the record are the judge's findings and rulings as well as the lease and the notice to quit. “It is the obligation of the appellant[ ] to include in the appendix those [materials], which are essential for review of the issues raised on appeal ....“ Shawmut Community Bank, N.A. v. Zagami, 30 Mass.App.Ct. 371, 372–373 (1991)

. Without the benefit of the entire record before us, we are unable to engage in meaningful appellate judicial review. See M.M. v. D.A., 79 Mass.App.Ct. 197, 207 (2011) (by failing to provide appellate court with complete transcripts, appellant cannot argue judge's finding is unsupported by evidence). We are not bound to look beyond the record appendix. Kunen v. First Agric. Natl. Bank of Berkshire County, 6 Mass.App.Ct. 684, 690–691 (1978).

From the transcript of the brief trial, it appears that the defendant leased a certain premises from the plaintiff. That lease expired on its own terms in August, 2015. The defendant did not sign the lease renewal offered by the plaintiff, and the plaintiff served him with a notice to quit. The defendant presented no legitimate defense explaining his refusal to vacate the premises. There is no evidence in the record before us of any rent payments made by Kracher under the lease or for use and occupancy of the premises. Kracher's statement in his brief that he is making payments is not a substitute for record evidence of that fact. Even under the most generous reading of Kracher's appellate brief, it borders on the incomprehensible, and it utterly fails to support the issues raised with legal authority, as mandated by Mass.R.A.P. 16(a)(4)

, as amended, 367 Mass. 921 (1975). Pursuant to that rule, an appellant's brief must set forth an “argument, which shall contain the contentions of the appellant with respect to the issues presented, and the reasons therefor, with citations to the authorities, statutes and parts of the record...