Summary
The court held that a trial justice must provide written facts and reasons when disallowing a draft report under Dist./Mun. Cts. R. Civ. P. 64(c)(5). Nevertheless, the defendants’ petition to establish the draft report was denied because the report was filed twenty days after judgment, beyond the ten-day deadline, and the defendants had no remaining right to appellate review.
Holdings
- Rule 64(c)(5) requires a trial justice who disallows a draft report to set forth succinctly in writing the facts and reasons for the disallowance.
- A party forfeits the right to appellate review by failing to file a draft report within the ten-day period prescribed by Rule 64(c)(1)(ii), absent a valid basis for extension.
- The disposition of a motion for additional time to submit a draft report rests within the sound discretion of the trial justice.
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial justice was required by Rule 64(c)(5) to state in writing the facts and reasons for disallowing the defendants' draft report.
- Whether the defendants were entitled to have the draft report established despite filing it twenty days after judgment and outside Rule 64(c)(1)(ii)'s ten-day deadline.
- Whether the denial of the defendants' motion for additional time to file the draft report was reviewable in the petition proceeding.
Disposition
writ_denied
Cases Cited (7)
- Patterson v. Ciborowski, 277 Mass. 260, 264-266 (1931)(followed)
- Sechrest v. Safiol, 80 1980 Mass. App. Div. 133, 135(followed)
- Langone v. Hayden, Mass. App. Div. Adv. Sh. (1978) 70, 73(followed)
- Microsonics, Inc. v. Comrex Corp., 39 Mass. App. Dec. 229, 233-234 (1968)(followed)
- Ahern v. Towle, 310 Mass. 695, 699 (1942)(followed)
- Whitney v. Medeiros, 56 Mass. App. Dec. 112, 116 (1975)(followed)
- Meola Construction Co. v. Ace Bldg. Supply Co., Mass. App. Div. Adv. Sh. (1978) 466, 467(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…