seal

Court Case Record MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICE & others vs. MARIE O''BRIEN 2012-J-0476 UID(8ac6)


MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICE & others vs. MARIE O''BRIEN Court Case Record

Court Case Number: 2012-J-0476


 
Case Number2012-J-0476
Case TitleMINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICE & others vs. MARIE O''BRIEN
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CountyMiddlesex Probate & Fam
CourtMiddlesex Probate & Fam
Court Address
Phone
Field Date12/26/2012
Close Date12/26/2012

Parties

CounselNameType
James M. O'Sullivan, EsquireMinuteman Senior ServicePlaintiff
James O'BrienPlaintiff/Petitioner
Roland W. ViditoPlaintiff
Sydney G. WhitePlaintiff
Marie O'BrienDefendant/Respondent
Jewish Family & Children's ServiOther/respondent
Mary CiccarelliOther/respondent
David McNair, EsquirePro Se Plaintiff
DOCKET ENTRIES
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
12/26/2012 #1 Motion to waive entry fee, filed by James O'Brien, is allowed.
12/26/2012 #2 Petition pursuant to M.G.L. c. 231, § 118 and/or MRAP 6 with attachments (Middlesex Probate and Family Court October 1, 2012 decision), filed by James O'Brien.
12/26/2012 #3 Petition pursuant to M.G.L. c. 231, § 118 and/or MRAP 6 with attachments (Woburn District Court December 13, 2012 decision), filed by James O'Brien.
12/26/2012 RE#2: After careful examination of Mr. O'Brien's petition, I do not find any serious grounds for relief from the orders of the probate judge or from the terms of his agreement to vacate the premises at 33 Eugene Rd, Burlington. The standards for relief are rigorous, and a petitioner must show either a clear error of law or abuse of discretion by the trial court. I do not see either of those grounds in the present instance. (Sikora, J.) *Notice/Attest.
12/26/2012 RE#3: After careful examination of Mr. O'Brien's petition, I do not find any serious grounds for relief from the orders of the probate judge or from the terms of his agreement to vacate the premises at 33 Eugene Rd, Burlington. The standards for relief are rigorous, and a petitioner must show either a clear error of law or abuse of discretion by the trial court. I do not see either of those grounds in the present instance. (Sikora, J.) *Notice/Attest.