Case Name: Jack Saade vs. Zoning Commission of the City of Boston & another
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts
Decision Date: 2001-11-30
Citations: 435 Mass. 1009
Docket Number: 
Parties: Jack Saade vs. Zoning Commission of the City of Boston & another.
Judges: 
Reporter: Massachusetts Reports
Volume: 435
Pages: 1009–1010

Head Matter:
Jack Saade vs. Zoning Commission of the City of Boston & another.
November 30, 2001.
Supreme Judicial Court,
Inspectional Services Department of the city of Boston.

Opinion:
The order of the Land Court judge is interlocutory, so we consider whether the petitioner has, as rule 2:21 (2) requires, "set forth . . . reasons why review of the trial court decision cannot adequately be obtained on appeal . or by other available means." The petitioner has alleged in his memorandum filed under rule 2:21 that his "substantive equal protection rights" and his "substantive due process rights" have been violated; that certain cases have a bearing on the action; and that the BRA should be a party to the action. He states, in conclusion, that he "will suffer irreparable harm" and that he does not have other appellate options. These statements do not rise to the level required by rule 2:21 (2).
Jack Saade, pro se.
Judgment affirmed.
The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by a memorandum of law.