Title: Briscoe v. Middlesex Division of the Juvenile Court Department

State: massachusetts

Issuer: Massachusetts Supreme Court

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revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound 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-12615 
 
AKKIMA DANNIELLE BRISCOE  vs.  MIDDLESEX DIVISION 
OF THE JUVENILE COURT DEPARTMENT.1 
 
 
January 25, 2019. 
 
 
Practice, Civil, Action in nature of mandamus. 
 
 
 
The plaintiff, Akkima Dannielle Briscoe, appeals from a 
judgment of a single justice of this court dismissing, without a 
hearing, her complaint seeking relief in the nature of mandamus. 
See G. L. c. 249, § 5.  There was no error. 
 
 
This appeal arises out of a delinquency proceeding in the 
Juvenile Court against the plaintiff's minor child.  In her 
complaint, the plaintiff claimed that a summons requiring her 
appearance at a hearing before the Juvenile Court was defective, 
that the ensuing hearing was unfair, and that a writ of mandamus 
should issue requiring that the delinquency proceeding against 
the child be terminated.  The single justice dismissed the 
complaint, concluding that the plaintiff is not entitled to 
relief under G. L. c. 249, § 5. 
 
 
It was incumbent on the plaintiff, as the party seeking the 
extraordinary remedy of mandamus, to provide a factual record 
adequate to support her allegations, to demonstrate that she had 
standing to raise the claims, and to show that she had no 
adequate alternative remedial route.  Because the plaintiff 
                                                          
 
 
1 Although the papers filed by the plaintiff in this court 
identify the defendant as the "Office of the Middlesex County 
District Attorney," the district attorney was not party to the 
complaint filed in the county court. 
 
2 
 
 
failed to meet her burden, there is no reason to disturb the 
single justice's judgment. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Judgment affirmed.  
 
 
 
The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by 
a memorandum of law. 
 
Akkima Dannielle Briscoe, pro se.