seal

Court Case Record DAVID SATLOFF vs. SUSAN SARGENT, PH.D 2011-J-0395 UID(6ebb)


DAVID SATLOFF vs. SUSAN SARGENT, PH.D Court Case Record

Court Case Number: 2011-J-0395


 
Case Number2011-J-0395
Case TitleDAVID SATLOFF vs. SUSAN SARGENT, PH.D
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CountyMiddlesex
CourtMiddlesex Superior Court
Court Address
Phone
Field Date09/07/2011
Close Date09/12/2011

Parties

CounselNameType
Brian T. Hatch, EsquireDavid SatloffPlaintiff/Petitioner
Steven S. Broadley, EsquireSusan Sargent, Ph.DDefendant/Respondent
DOCKET ENTRIES
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
09/07/2011 #1 Request for interlocutory review of the Decision and Order of Middlessex Superior Court, C.A. No. 07-01409D dated June 13, 2011, filed by David Satloff.
09/08/2011 #2 Preliminary memorandum in opposition to request for interlocutory relief, filed by Susan Sargent, Ph.D.
09/12/2011 #3 Documents to supplement the petition, filed by David Satloff.
09/12/2011 #4 ORDER: The plaintiff, David Satloff, seeks review under G.L. c. 231, sec. 118, par. 1, of a June 13, 2011, Middlesex Superior Court (Tuttman, J.) order allowing the defendant's motion for summary judgment as to three of four counts of the plaintiff's complaint. The plaintiff seeks reversal of the court's allowance of the defendant's motion for summary judgment as to the three counts. The plaintiff's petition is untimely, as he has brought it more than thirty days following entry of the order from which he seeks relief. Accordingly, the single justice is without jurisdiction to act on the petition. Cf. Friedman v. Board of Regis. in Medicine, 414 Mass. 663, 665 (1993); Nissan Motor Corp. v. Commissioner of Revenue, 407 Mass. 153, 157 (1990); Flynn v. CRABB, 17 Mass. App. Ct. 668, 669-670 (1984). The thirty-day limit is a statutory limit which may not be enlarged by the single justice, and the same principle applies to the trial court. The plaintiff's request for relief is denied. (Cypher, J.) *Notice/Attest/Tuttman, J.