Legal Opinion

Roe v. Rosencratz

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided December 28, 2007No. 06-P-1634PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Jane Roe, a pro se plaintiff, appeals from a single justice order denying her requests to waive filing fees in this court. She argues that G. L. c. 261, § 27C(2),1 and the Instructions to Courts on the Administration of the Indigent Court Costs Law, Mass. Gen. Laws Ann., Supreme Judicial Court Rules (Thomson West 2006) (Indigency Instructions),2 require the clerk3 of this court to grant a request for waiver of fees, and preclude referral of the matter to a judge, when the plaintiff’s affidavit states on its face that she meets the requirements for indigency described in G. L. c. 261, § 27 A.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Otis v. Arbella Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
  2. East Cambridge Savings Bank v. WheelerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1996
  3. Conservation Commission v. PachecoMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2000
  4. Hunt v. Appeals CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
  5. Cepulonis v. Superintendent, Massachusetts Correctional Institution, Cedar JunctionMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2004

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Adjartey v. Cent. Div. of the Hous. Court DepartmentandMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2019
  2. Reade v. Secretary of the CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2015
  3. Wassenar v. Department of Environmental ProtectionMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2014

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API