seal

Court Case Record CATHERINE BARBER vs. LIVING CARE VILLAGES OF MASSACHUSETTS INC & others 2010-J-0546 UID(9866)


CATHERINE BARBER vs. LIVING CARE VILLAGES OF MASSACHUSETTS INC & others Court Case Record

Court Case Number: 2010-J-0546


 
Case Number2010-J-0546
Case TitleCATHERINE BARBER vs. LIVING CARE VILLAGES OF MASSACHUSETTS INC & others
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CountyNorfolk
CourtNorfolk Superior Court
Court Address
Phone
Field Date12/01/2010
Close Date12/02/2010

Parties

CounselNameType
Catherine BarberPro Se Plaintiff/Petitioner
Thomas M. Franco, Esquire Tory A. Weigand, EsquireLiving Care Villages of MassachuDefendant/Respondent
Thomas M. Franco, EsquireNorth Hill SNEDefendant/Respondent
Thomas M. Franco, EsquireKevin L. BurkeDefendant/Respondent
Unknown Named Persons & assigneeDefendant
DOCKET ENTRIES
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
12/01/2010 #1 Motion to waive entry fee, filed by Catherine Barber, is allowed.
12/01/2010 #2 PETITION purs to GLc 231, s. 118 w/attach, filed by Catherine Barber.
12/02/2010 #3 ORDER: "The court DENIES the petitioner's request, pursuant to G. L. c. 231, § 118, first paragraph, for interlocutory relief from a Superior Court judge's denial of the petitioner's motion for reconsideration of the allowance of summary judgment in favor of defendant Kevin Burke. The judge denied reconsideration on November 3, 2010. A motion for reconsideration typically calls upon the discretion of a judge of a trial court. See Peterson v. Hopson, 306 Mass. 597, 602 (1940). An appellate court therefore reviews the ruling upon such a motion for abuse of discretion. Decisional law furnished guidance. The applicant for reconsideration should show (1) newly discovered evidence, or (2) change of circumstances, or (3) change of law, or (4) plain error of law or fact in the original ruling. Peterson v. Hopson, supra at 600; Barbosa v. Hopper Feeds, Inc., 404 Mass. 610, 622 (1989). The present petition and accompanying memorandum do not meet any of those criteria. They show no abuse of discretion. Consequently I must DENY relief and DISMISS the petition." (Sikora, J.) *Notice/Attest/Image.
12/09/2010 #4 Notice of appeal filed by Catherine Barber.
12/09/2010 #5 Motion for fee waiver to enter notice of appeal to three judge panel filed by Catherine Barber.
12/09/2010 #6 Motion for expedited proceedings for senior citizen plaintiff filed by Catherine Barber.
12/10/2010 #7 RE#4: The defendant's notice of appeal from the denial of her petition brought pursuant to G. L. c. 231, § 118, is hereby struck as there is no such right of appeal. Cf. McMenimen v. Passatempo, 452 Mass. 178 (2008); Gibbs Ford, Inc. v. United Truck Leasing Corp., 399 Mass. 8, n.8 (1987). By the Court (Sikora, J.) *Notice/Attest
12/10/2010 RE#6: See action of this date on paper #4. *Notice/Attest.
12/13/2010 RE#4: (Amended Action) The plaintiff's notice of appeal from the denial of her petition brought pursuant to G. L. 231, § 118, is hereby struck as there is no such right of appeal. McMenimen v. Passatempo, 452 Mass. 178 (2008); Gibbs Ford, Inc. v. United Truck Leasing Corp., 399 Mass. 8, n. 8 (1987). (Meade, J.). Notice/attest/Troy, J.
12/13/2010 RE#5: No action necessary as no fee is required for this filing. See also amended action of this date on P#4. Notice
12/13/2010 RE#6: (Amended Action) See amended action this date on P#4. Notice
07/01/2011 Letter from Catherine Barber re: Request for copy of decision.
07/06/2011 Copy of paper no. 3 sent to Catherine Barber.