seal

Court Case Record KERRI L. SMITH vs. STEVEN MASTALERZ 2011-P-0892 UID(631a)


KERRI L. SMITH vs. STEVEN MASTALERZ Court Case Record

Court Case Number: 2011-P-0892


 
Case Number2011-P-0892
Case TitleKERRI L. SMITH vs. STEVEN MASTALERZ
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CountyNewton District, MI
CourtNewton District, MI
Court Address
Phone
Field Date11/05/2010
Close Date09/14/2012

Parties

CounselNameType
Kerri L. SmithPro Se Plaintiff/Appellee
Kathleen Marie McCarthy, EsquireSteven MastalerzDefendant/Appellant
DOCKET ENTRIES
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
05/20/2011 #1 Entered.
05/20/2011 #2 Notice of entry sent.
06/29/2011 #3 SERVICE of brief & appendix for Defendant/Appellant Steven Mastalerz.
10/03/2011 #4 ORDER: Appellate proceedings on the within case, which is an appeal from the entry of a harassment prevention order pursuant to G. L. c. 258E, are stayed pending the Supreme Judicial Court's issuance of a decision in a case that raises related issues, Borowski v. O'Brien, S.J.C. No. 10866, which is scheduled for argument in November 2011. The appellant is to file a status report on or before November 18, 2011, as to the proceedings in SJC-10866. *Notice
11/01/2011 #5 Notice of change of address of Kathleen Marie McCarthy, Esquire.
11/21/2011 #6 Status Report, filed by Steven Mastalerz.
11/21/2011 #7 RE#5: Appellate proceedings STAYED to 01/09/2012. Status report due 01/09/2012. *Notice.
01/12/2012 #8 Status Report, filed by Steven Mastalerz.
01/13/2012 #9 RE#6: Appellate proceedings STAYED to 03/13/2012. Status report due 03/13/2012. *Notice.
02/08/2012 #10 Motion to vacate the stay and proceed with case, filed by Steven Mastalerz.
02/13/2012 RE#7: Allowed. The stay of appellate proceedings is hereby vacated. Appellee's brief is due on or before 3/16/12. *Notice.
05/29/2012 Under consideration by Panel. (Mills, J., Fecteau, J., Hanlon, J.).
08/16/2012 Decision: Rescript Opinion. Appeal dismissed as moot. *Notice.
08/27/2012 PETITION for Rehearing, filed by Steven Mastalerz.@
09/12/2012 ORDER: In a petition for rehearing, counsel for the appellant represents that,"his court is mistaken in its finding that [O'Brien v.] Borowski [461 Mass. 415 (2012)] compelled dismissal of the appeal as moot. First, the order was extended after hearing and is presently in effect." Nothing in the record before this court supports counsel's representation that the order was extended and remains in effect. In addition, to the extent that the appellant argues that we should distinguish this case from the holding of the Supreme Judicial Court in O'Brien v. Borowski, supra, we decline to do so. Accordingly, the petition is denied and the order dismissing the matter as moot will stand. (Mills, Fecteau & Hanlon, JJ.). *Notice.
09/14/2012 RESCRIPT to Trial Court.