Opinion
10-P-2029
10-12-2011
JOSEPH AMORE v. TRUSTEES OF 328 COMMERCIAL STREET REVISED CONDOMINIUM & another.
NOTICE: Decisions issued by the Appeals Court pursuant to its rule 1:28 are primarily addressed to the parties and, therefore, may not fully address the facts of the case or the panel's decisional rationale. Moreover, rule 1:28 decisions are not circulated to the entire court and, therefore, represent only the views of the panel that decided the case. A summary decision pursuant to rule 1:28, issued after February 25, 2008, may be cited for its persuasive value but, because of the limitations noted above, not as binding precedent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
As the plaintiff acknowledges, even where excusable neglect is shown, one seeking an extension of time under Mass.R.A.P. 14(b), as amended, 378 Mass. 939 (1979), must also demonstrate that he or she has a 'meritorious appeal' in the sense of one worthy of presentation to the court (although of course not one which is sure of success). Commonwealth v. Barclay, 424 Mass. 377, 379 (1997). Even were we to find in this case that the plaintiff's failure to docket the appeal was a result of excusable neglect, the plaintiff has not made a sufficient showing that his appeal is meritorious in this sense so as to warrant granting the relief requested.
Order dated September 14, 2010, affirmed.
By the Court (Grasso, Katzmann & Rubin, JJ.),