Opinion
16-P-1202
04-21-2017
A.N. v. R.D.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
The plaintiff appeals from an order of a single justice of this court, denying her motion to stay the execution of a judgment of divorce nisi pending appeal, pursuant to Mass.R.A.P. 6, as appearing in 454 Mass. 1601 (2009). Preceding the single justice's order, was an order by a judge of the Probate and Family Court denying a similar motion. The appeal before us concerns only the order of the single justice. We affirm.
The plaintiff's brief does not include the motion to stay that she brought before the single justice. It is therefore, subject to dismissal for failure to comply with Mass.R.A.P. 16(a), as amended, 367 Mass. 921 (1975). Nonetheless, we consider her arguments.
Instead, the plaintiff provides the motion that she brought before the Probate and Family Court judge.
--------
We review the single justice's determination for abuse of discretion. See Cartledge v. Evans, 67 Mass. App. Ct. 577, 578 (2006). At oral argument, the plaintiff informed the panel that one of the issues that she raises on appeal, in regard to the order requiring her to refinance mortgages, has been disposed of. As to her other claims, the plaintiff has failed to make a showing that the single justice abused her discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion to stay pending appeal. See ibid. See also Gifford v. Gifford, 451 Mass. 1012, 1013 (2008), quoting from Mezoff v. Cudnohufsky, 5 Mass. App. Ct. 874, 874 (1977) (" ‘Rarely, if ever, can it be said that a single justice is in error in denying relief’ under Mass.R.A.P. 6").
Therefore, the single justice's order denying the requested stay must be affirmed.
So ordered.
Affirmed.