Samia v. D'Annunzio

Summary

The Massachusetts Appellate Division dismissed D’Annunzio’s appeal arising from consolidated commercial tenancy and summary process actions. The court held that the initial notice of appeal was ineffective because it was filed before disposition of a Rule 59 motion, and that the later notice was untimely. The court also found no good cause for the late appendix and determined that the appendix was substantively incomplete.

Holdings

1. A notice of appeal filed before disposition of a timely Rule 59(e) motion is a nullity, and a new notice must be filed within the prescribed period after the motion is decided. Because D’Annunzio filed his new notice one day after the ten-day period expired and sought no extension, the appeal was subject to dismissal.
2. A party seeking relief from an untimely notice of appeal or appendix must invoke the applicable rule and demonstrate excusable neglect or good cause; mere unfamiliarity with or inattention to appellate rules does not establish good cause.
3. An appellant must provide an accurate and sufficiently complete appendix containing the relevant trial record necessary for appellate review; an incomplete appendix that omits the evidence supporting the claimed error prevents effective review.
4. The denial of D’Annunzio’s motion to amend the judgment was not shown to be an abuse of discretion.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed because the initial notice of appeal was filed before disposition of the Rule 59(e) motion and the subsequent notice was filed outside the applicable ten-day period.
2. Whether the appellant established excusable neglect or good cause for the untimely notice of appeal.
3. Whether the appellant established good cause for filing the appellate appendix late.
4. Whether the incomplete appendix permitted review of the claimed error in the electricity damages award or demonstrated an abuse of discretion in denying the Rule 59(e) motion.

Disposition

dismissed