Foley v. Commonwealth

Summary

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed a single justice’s denial of the plaintiffs’ requests for mandamus, injunctive relief, and reconsideration. The court held that mandamus could not be used to compel or reverse interlocutory rulings by a Superior Court judge, particularly where adequate alternative remedies had not been shown, and noted the plaintiffs’ failure to comply with applicable procedural requirements.

Holdings

1. Mandamus is unavailable to direct a judicial officer to make a particular decision or to review or reverse a decision on an issue properly before that officer, particularly where the plaintiffs have not shown the absence of an adequate alternative remedy.
2. None of the plaintiffs' other claims warranted extraordinary interlocutory intervention by the single justice, and the plaintiffs had not shown why available appellate or statutory procedures could not provide the requested relief.
3. S.J.C. Rule 2:21 applied to the plaintiffs' challenge to relief from interlocutory Superior Court rulings, and the plaintiffs' failure to comply with that rule independently supported affirmance of the single justice's decision.

Questions Presented

1. Whether mandamus could issue to require reversal of the Superior Court judge's interlocutory rulings on defendants' motions to dismiss.
2. Whether the plaintiffs were entitled to extraordinary interlocutory intervention or a stay of foreclosure-related proceedings.
3. Whether the plaintiffs' appeal from the single justice's denial of relief from interlocutory rulings was barred by failure to comply with S.J.C. Rule 2:21.

Disposition

affirmed