Narrative Opinion Summary
In this case, the appellant, a tenant involved in a summary process action in the Housing Court, sought certiorari relief under G. L. c. 249, § 4, arguing that the Housing Court lacked jurisdiction over her eviction due to her status as a 'low income housing tax credit' tenant. She contended that this status allowed her to enforce a recorded restrictive covenant, thereby invalidating the eviction proceedings. The single justice denied her request without a hearing, maintaining that certiorari review is meant to address procedural errors not subject to review by other means, such as direct appeal or postjudgment motions. The appellant had not demonstrated that her claims were unreviewable through these alternative channels. Furthermore, the court clarified that while the appellant could represent herself, she was not permitted to represent others in court. The ruling affirmed the single justice's decision, concluding there was no error or abuse of discretion in denying the certiorari relief. The outcome underscores the procedural limitations and proper channels for addressing jurisdictional issues in eviction cases under Massachusetts law.
Legal Issues Addressed
Certiorari Relief Under G. L. c. 249, § 4subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Certiorari relief is not appropriate when issues can be reviewed through direct appeal or postjudgment motions.
Reasoning: Certiorari review is intended to correct errors in proceedings not otherwise reviewable by motion or appeal. Stevenson failed to show that her claims were not reviewable through other means, such as direct appeal to the Appeals Court or through postjudgment motions in the Housing Court.
Jurisdiction of Housing Court in Summary Process Actionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Housing Court has jurisdiction over summary process actions, and challenges to this jurisdiction should not be raised through certiorari relief.
Reasoning: Stevenson claims she is a 'low income housing tax credit' tenant entitled to enforce a recorded restrictive covenant, arguing that the Housing Court lacks jurisdiction over such matters...
Self-representation in Courtsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: While individuals may represent themselves, they cannot represent others or groups in legal proceedings.
Reasoning: It was noted that while Stevenson can represent herself, she cannot represent another individual or a group of similarly situated individuals in court.