Case Name: Lalit K. Parekh vs. Carlita Q. Parekh
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts
Decision Date: 1996-01-11
Citations: 421 Mass. 1009
Docket Number: 
Parties: Lalit K. Parekh vs. Carlita Q. Parekh.
Judges: 
Reporter: Massachusetts Reports
Volume: 421
Pages: 1009–1009

Head Matter:
Lalit K. Parekh vs. Carlita Q. Parekh.
January 11, 1996.
Supreme Judicial Court,
The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by a memorandum of law.
David W. Rifkitt & Patrick Morgan for the plaintiff.
Pamela Casey O’Brien for the defendant.

Opinion:
This is a purported appeal under S.J.C. Rule 2:21, post 1303 (1995), from the denial pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3, of relief from an order entered against the plaintiff appellant in a G. L. c. 209A proceeding. The appellant has omitted necessary papers from the record: a copy of the petition to the single justice and a copy of the docket in the county court. An order entered in a G. L. c. 209A proceeding is not an interlocutory order of the trial court subject to S.J.C. Rule 2:21. For the purposes of appeal in this case, S.J.C. Rule 2:21 is inapplicable. An appeal pursuant to the regular appellate process is the appropriate avenue for the appellant to pursue.
The court need take no action pursuant to S.J.C. Rule 2:21. The appellant may pursue his appeal according to the regular process.