Rothman v. Trister
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- W.R.S. v. R.S. (Mass. App. Ct. 2018)
- P.M. v. J.M. (Mass. App. Ct. 2018)
- X.Z. v. H.D. (Mass. App. Ct. 2018)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The petitioner, Moshe Rothman, appeals from the judgment of a single justice of this court denying relief pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3. We affirm.
The single justice of this court correctly determined that this was not an appropriate occasion to exercise the court’s extraordinary power of general superintendence. The petitioner’s failure to perfect his appeals in the Appeals Court was of his own doing. Although he was acting pro se, he nevertheless was bound to comply with the governing court rules. See Mmoe v. Commonwealth, 393 Mass. 617, 620 (1985); International Fid. Ins. Co. v. Wilson, 387 Mass. 841, 847 (1983). Moreover, there was no demonstration in the petitioner’s submissions before the single justice of this court, or in his submissions before the full court, that the single justices of the Appeals Court had erred or abused their discretion. See Tisei v. Building Inspector of Marlborough, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 377, 379 (1975) (discussing moving party’s burden in seeking permission to docket appeal late).
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.