Court Case Record S.D.P. V COMMONWEALTH 2010-P-1892 UID(8a0d)

S.D.P. V COMMONWEALTH Court Case Record

Court Case Number: 2010-P-1892

Case Number2010-P-1892
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CourtEssex Superior Court
Court Address
Field Date10/13/2005
Close Date05/01/2012


David Hirsch, Esquire William A. Korman, EsquireS.D.P.Plaintiff/Appellant
Mary P. Murray, EsquireCommonwealthDefendant/Appellee
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
10/26/2010 #1 Entered.
10/26/2010 #2 Motion to docket late allowed. See 10-J-493.
10/26/2010 #3 Notice of entry sent.
12/01/2010 #4 MOTION to extend brief & appendix due date, filed by George Edward Schrempf.
12/03/2010 #5 RE#2: Extension to 01/06/2011 granted for filing of brief of George Edward Schrempf, Plaintiff/Appellant. Notice to counsel.
12/16/2010 #6 SERVICE of brief & appendix for Plaintiff/Appellant George Edward Schrempf.
01/14/2011 #7 MOTION to extend brief due date of Commonwealth.
01/18/2011 #8 RE#4: Allowed to 02/08/11. Notice
02/14/2011 #9 MOTION to extend brief due date of Commonwealth.
02/14/2011 #10 RE#5: Allowed to 2/14/11. Notice.
02/14/2011 #11 SERVICE of brief for Defendant/Appellee Commonwealth.
02/25/2011 #12 MOTION to extend reply brief due date, filed by George Edward Schrempf.
02/25/2011 #13 RE#7: Allowed to 4/26/10. No further enlargements. Notice.
03/09/2011 #14 SERVICE of reply brief for Plaintiff/Appellant George Edward Schrempf.
07/21/2011 #15 Notice of 09/08/2011, 9:30 AM argument at John Adams Courthouse, Courtroom 4 sent.
07/27/2011 MOTION to continue, filed by Commonwealth.
07/27/2011 RE#10: Allowed. Case is placed on the September 15, 2011 oral argument list. *Notice.
08/09/2011 Notice of 09/15/2011, 9:30 AM argument at John Adams Courthouse, Courtroom 4 sent.
09/12/2011 Letter pursuant to MRAP 16(l) filed by S.D.P.
09/15/2011 Oral argument held. (Rapoza, C.J.,Cohen J, Agnes,J.).
03/05/2012 ORDER: Upon entry of this case in the Appeals Court, the clerk's office designated it as fully impounded. However, review of the Superior Court's docket indicates that the case was not impounded in that court. Further, it appears that the case should not be impounded because it is the respondent's appeal from his civil commitment as a sexually dangerous person, per G. L. c. 123A, 14(d), and cases of this nature are not required to be impounded by the statute. Consequently, the docket in this case is hereby changed to "partial impoundment" in the event that the record contains names of victims whose identity shall not be disseminated to the public pursuant to G. L. c. 265, s 24C. The parties' briefs and record appendix must comply with G. L. c. 265, ยง 24C; Mass.R.A.P. 16 (d), 16(m), and 18 (g). By the court 3/05/12 . *Notice/Attest.
03/15/2012 Response to paper #13 and request for clarification, filed by Commonwealth.