Case Title: Bigelow v. Massachusetts Courts Promulgator of Official Forms

Citation: 

Docket Number: SJC-12794

State: massachusetts

Court: Massachusetts Supreme Court

Date: 2020-05-28T00:00:00Z

Document:
NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal 
revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound 
volumes of the Official Reports.  If you find a typographical 
error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of 
Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 
Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557-
1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us 
 
SJC-12794 
 
JAMES B. BIGELOW & others1  vs.  MASSACHUSETTS COURTS PROMULGATOR 
OF THE OFFICIAL FORMS & others.2 
 
 
May 28, 2020. 
 
 
                                                          
 
1 Annette S. Bent, Linda Boguslav, Bruce Boguslav, Steven 
Bourassa, Jennifer Guzman-Gayflor, Edward A. Higgott, Cheryl 
LeBlanc, Christine Mackenzie, William Marks, Debra McCarthy, 
Keith McKenzie, Paulette McKenzie, Janet L. Montgomery, Cudjoe 
Ofosu, Mychelyne Oliveira, Susan Osborne, Linda Potter, Brian 
Potter, Phyllis Prempeh, Thomas Saxe, Sherry Stanley, Tracey 
Tobin, Maria Valle, Steven Wilbur, and R. Susan Woods. 
 
 
2 Trial Court; Appeals Court; Reem Property, LLC; BLB 
Trading, LLC; Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as trustee 
on behalf of Ameriquest Mortgage Securities, Inc., Asset-Backed 
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-R10; Fannie Mae; PROF-
2013-S3 Legal Title Trust II by U.S. Bank, N.A., as legal title 
trustee; CitiBank, N.A., as trustee for PMT NPL Financing 2015-
1; U.S. Bank, N.A., as Trustee on behalf of Bear Stearns Asset-
Backed Securities 1 Trust 2005-AC2, Asset-Backed Certificates, 
Series 2005-AC2; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee of Option 
One Mortgage Loan Trust 2007-3, Asset-Backed Certificates, 
Series 2007-3; HSBC Bank USA, N.A., as trustee for Ace 
Securities Corp. Home Equity Loan Trust, Series 2004-OP1 Asset-
Backed Pass-Through Certificates; Lisa Y. Barron; Rose Alvarado, 
LLC; Michael C. Jardus, trustee of the Edward C. Jardis Living 
Trust et al.; Peter Natsios, trustee of the Armandale Street RT; 
U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., as trustee for LSF9 Master Participation 
Trust; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee for GMACM Mortgage 
Loan Trust 2006-AR1; WF Master REO 2015-01, LLC; Martin Amaya 
Barraza, manager of Alinas Real Estate, LLC. 
2 
 
 
 
Summary Process, Appeal.  Practice, Civil, Summary process, 
Appeal, Bond.  Supreme Judicial Court, Superintendence of 
inferior courts. 
 
 
The plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of a single justice 
of this court denying their complaint for relief in the nature 
of mandamus and for extraordinary relief pursuant to 
G. L. c. 211, § 3.  We affirm. 
 
Each of the plaintiffs is or was a defendant in a post-
foreclosure summary process action in the Housing Court 
Department or District Court Department of the Trial Court.  In 
each such case, after an adverse judgment in the trial court, 
the plaintiff was required to post an appeal bond, to make 
periodic use and occupancy payments, or both, during the 
pendency of his or her summary process appeal.  In each case, 
the plaintiff sought and obtained review of the bond or "use and 
occupancy" order, from either a single justice of the Appeals 
Court or from the District Court Appellate Division, as 
appropriate, and in each case the order was affirmed. 
 
The plaintiffs then collectively filed this complaint for 
relief in the nature of mandamus and for extraordinary relief 
pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3, in the county court, seeking 
relief from the various bond and "use and occupancy" orders.  
The plaintiffs also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction 
and emergency stay in the county court.  The single justice 
ultimately denied all substantive relief sought and denied a 
subsequent motion for reconsideration.  The plaintiffs now 
appeal. 
 
"Regardless of whether relief is requested in the nature of 
certiorari or mandamus, or by means of the court's extraordinary 
power of general superintendence, relief is available only where 
the petitioner demonstrates the absence of an adequate and 
effective alternative remedy."  Wallace v. PNC Bank, N.A., 478 
Mass. 1020, 1020 (2018), and cases cited.  "Decisions of a 
single justice will not be disturbed on appeal absent clear 
error of law or abuse of discretion."  Adjartey v. Central Div. 
of the Housing Court Dep't, 481 Mass. 830, 833 (2019), quoting 
Fogarty v. Commonwealth, 406 Mass. 103, 106 (1989). 
 
In the case of an order requiring a tenant or occupant in a 
summary process action to post a bond pending appeal, to pay 
periodic "rent" or "use and occupancy" payments pending appeal, 
or both, review is available in the form of an appeal to a 
3 
 
 
 
single justice of the Appeals Court (if the order was made in 
the Housing Court) or to the District Court Appellate Division 
(if the order was made in the District Court).  See G. L. 
c. 239, §§ 5 & 6. 
 
Here, the plaintiffs do not dispute that they availed 
themselves of this opportunity for review.  To the extent they 
wished to challenge the bond or use and occupancy orders 
further, "[t]he proper course for [them] to have followed . . . 
was to refuse to pay the bond, suffer the dismissal of [their] 
summary process appeal[s], and then appeal to the Appeals Court 
(on the limited bond issue) from the order of dismissal."  
Matter of an Appeal Bond (No. 1), 428 Mass. 1013, 1013 (1998) 
(collecting cases).  See Wallace, supra at 1021 (quoting same). 
 
The plaintiffs were not entitled as of right to an 
additional layer of review of the bond and use and occupancy 
orders in this court, whether through a complaint for relief in 
the nature of mandamus or through a petition for extraordinary 
relief pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3.  See Wallace supra at 
1020; Votta v. Police Dep't of Billerica, 444 Mass. 1001, 1001 
(2005). 
 
We have reviewed all of the plaintiffs' other claims on 
appeal as well.  None of them requires further discussion.  The 
single justice was correct to deny relief on all of them. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
 
 
The case was submitted on briefs. 
 
James B. Bigelow, Annette S. Bent, Linda Boguslav, Bruce 
Boguslav, Steven Bourassa, Jennifer Guzman-Gayflor, Edward A. 
Higgott, Cheryl LeBlanc, Christine Mackenzie, William Marks, 
Debra McCarthy, Keith McKenzie, Paulette McKenzie, Janet L. 
Montgomery, Cudjoe Ofosu, Mychelyne Oliveira, Susan Osborne, 
Linda Potter, Brian Potter, Phyllis Prempeh, Thomas Saxe, Sherry 
Stanley, Tracey Tobin, Maria Valle, Steven Wilbur, & R. Susan 
Woods, pro se. 
 
Robert J. Durant, Jr., & Stephanie Sprague for Deutsche 
Bank National Trust Company & another. 
 
Kevin P. Polansky for Citibank, N.A. 
 
Brett L. Messinger, of Pennsylvania, & James C. Carignan 
for Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.