Maza v. Com.
| Citation | 667 N.E.2d 1146,423 Mass. 1006 |
| Parties | America MAZA v. COMMONWEALTH. |
| Decision Date | 26 July 1996 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts |
America Maza, pro se.
Kristin E. McIntosh, Assistant Attorney General, for Commonwealth.
RESCRIPT.
After a single justice of the Appeals Court denied her motion to permit her appeal to be docketed out of time, Mass.R.A.P. 10(a)(3), 378 Mass. 937 (1979), the plaintiff renewed her motion in the county court. A single justice of this court treated the motion as a petition pursuant to G.L. c. 211, § 3 (1994 ed.), and denied it without a hearing. The plaintiff appeals.
A request for relief under G.L. c. 211, § 3, is properly denied where the petitioning party has or had adequate and effective avenues other than G.L. c. 211, § 3, by which to seek and obtain the requested relief. Plymouth & Brockton St. Ry. v. Leyland, 422 Mass. 526, 530-531, 664 N.E.2d 17 (1996). Adams v. Cumberland Farms, Inc., 420 Mass. 807, 652 N.E.2d 143 (1995). Greco v. Suffolk Div. of the Probate & Family Court Dep't, 418 Mass. 153, 156, 635 N.E.2d 243 (1994). In this case, the plaintiff could have appealed to a panel of the Appeals Court from the Appeals Court single justice's denial of her motion for permission to have her appeal docketed late. See, e.g., Aspen Square Management v. Walker, 37 Mass.App.Ct. 970, 644 N.E.2d 237 (1994); Robinson v. Commissioner of Dep't of Youth Servs., 7 Mass.App.Ct. 847, 384 N.E.2d 1253 (1979); Tisei v. Building Inspector of Marlborough, 3 Mass.App.Ct. 377, 330 N.E.2d 488 (1975). The plaintiff did not pursue that route. Although she has been acting pro se, she is held to the same standards as litigants who are represented by counsel. Solimine v. Davidian, 422 Mass. 1002, 661 N.E.2d 934 (1996). Brossard v. West Roxbury Div. of the Dist. Court Dep't, 417 Mass. 183, 184, 629 N.E.2d 295 (1994), and cases cited.
Judgment of the single justice affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McMenimen v. Passatempo
...then pending before Appeals Court, were reviewable by panel in accordance with last sentence of rule 15[c]); Maza v. Commonwealth, 423 Mass. 1006, 667 N.E.2d 1146 (1996) (order of Appeals Court single justice, pursuant to Mass. R.A.P. 10, 378 Mass. 937 (1979), denying leave to docket appeal......
-
Commonwealth v. Lucas
...because Lucas has an alternative remedy in the form of a motion to dismiss the criminal complaint. See, e.g., Maza v. Commonwealth, 423 Mass. 1006, 1006, 667 N.E.2d 1146 (1996) (“request for relief under G.L.c.211, § 3, is properly denied where the petitioning party has or had adequate and ......
-
Commonwealth v. Francis
...defendant the rigors of the requirements of the case law that hold him to the same standards as counsel, see Maza v. Commonwealth, 423 Mass. 1006, 1006, 667 N.E.2d 1146 (1996) ; Mmoe v. Commonwealth, 393 Mass. 617, 620, 473 N.E.2d 169 (1985), his failure to raise the issue in his first moti......
-
Neuwirth v. Neuwirth
...here, we see no reason not to hold him “to the same standards as litigants who are represented by counsel.” Maza v. Commonwealth, 423 Mass. 1006, 1006, 667 N.E.2d 1146 (1996). As noted, Neuwirth sought to strengthen his case for excusable neglect by claiming that his misunderstanding of the......