seal

Court Case Record URSULA WARD vs. AARON HERNANDEZ 2014-J-0508 UID(eec6)


URSULA WARD vs. AARON HERNANDEZ Court Case Record

Court Case Number: 2014-J-0508


 
Case Number2014-J-0508
Case TitleURSULA WARD vs. AARON HERNANDEZ
Case TypeCivil
StateMassachusetts, MA
CountyBristol
CourtBristol Superior Court
Court Address
Phone
Field Date12/23/2014
Close Date03/12/2015

Parties

CounselNameType
Douglas K. Sheff, EsquireUrsula WardPlaintiff/Petitioner
John D. Fitzpatrick, EsquireAaron HernandezDefendant/Respondent
DOCKET ENTRIES
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
12/23/2014 #1 Petition pursuant to M.G.L. c. 231, § 118 with attachments, filed by Ursula Ward^.
12/26/2014 #2 RE#1: Appellate proceedings stayed to 01/26/15. Status report due then as to the pending motion for reconsideration. *Notice/attest/Moses, J.
01/26/2015 #3 Status report, filed by Ursula Ward. ^
01/30/2015 #4 RE#2: Appellate proceedings stayed to 2/27/15. Status report due as to the pending motion for reconsideration. *Notice/Attest.
02/27/2015 Status report, filed by Ursula Ward^.
03/06/2015 Supplemental petition pursuant to M.G.L. c. 231, § 118 with attachments, filed by Ursula Ward. ^
03/12/2015 ORDER: A single justice will rarely interfere with the extremely broad discretion possessed by a trial judge in the management of litigation, including matters involving discovery, Resendes v. Boston Edison Co., 38 Mass. App. Ct. 344, 350 (1995), where, in general, discovery matters are committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge. Symmons v. O'Keeffe, 419 Mass. 288, 302 (1995). The petitioner has failed to establish that the trial court's orders as to the discovery motions at issue constituted an abuse of discretion in the circumstances of this case. Consequently, all relief requested in the petition is denied. (Maldonado, J.). Notice/attest/Moses, J.