Summary
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the denial of a petition under G. L. c. 211, § 3, challenging a medical malpractice tribunal’s determination that the plaintiff could proceed without posting a bond. The court held that relief under § 211, § 3, was unavailable because the petitioner had already sought review under G. L. c. 231, § 118, and had not shown that review could not be obtained through other available means.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether extraordinary relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3, was available to review the medical malpractice tribunal's decision after Giamarco had unsuccessfully sought relief under G. L. c. 231, § 118.
- Whether the single justice clearly erred or abused her discretion by denying Giamarco's petition.
Holdings
- Relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3, does not lie when review under G. L. c. 231, § 118, would suffice, and the extraordinary supervisory statute does not provide a second opportunity as a matter of right for interlocutory relief after relief under § 118 has been denied.
- The single justice did not commit a clear error of law or abuse her discretion in denying Giamarco's petition.
Key quotations
“Review under G. L. c. 211, § 3, does not lie where review under c. 231, § 118, would suffice.” (454 Mass. at 1021)
“Although [Giamarco's] petition pursuant to G. L. c. 231, § 118, was denied, G. L. c. 211, § 3, does not provide a second opportunity as a matter of right for interlocutory relief.” (454 Mass. at 1021)
“The power of this court to superintend the lower courts pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3, is extraordinary and is exercised sparingly.” (454 Mass. at 1022)
Factual background
Ruggiero filed a medical malpractice action against Giamarco. A medical malpractice tribunal concluded that her evidence, if properly substantiated, was sufficient to raise a legitimate question of liability, allowing her to proceed without posting a bond. Giamarco challenged that determination through several interlocutory procedures.
Procedural history
Ruggiero brought a medical malpractice claim against Giamarco in the District Court. The case was transferred to the Superior Court for a medical malpractice tribunal hearing under G. L. c. 231, § 60B; the tribunal found sufficient evidence to raise a legitimate question of liability and allowed Ruggiero to proceed without filing a bond. Giamarco unsuccessfully sought relief under G. L. c. 231, § 118, first paragraph, from a single justice and a panel of the Appeals Court, then filed a G. L. c. 211, § 3, petition in the Supreme Judicial Court. The single justice denied that petition, and the Supreme Judicial Court affirmed.