Pandey v. Pudlo

This is an appeal from a decision of a single justice denying relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3 (1992 ed.), without a hearing. There was no error and therefore we affirm.

The principal basis for denying relief was the failure of the plaintiff to use ordinary appellate review. We have said repeatedly that relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3, is not a substitute for ordinary appellate review. See Francis v. District Attorney for the Plymouth Dist., 388 Mass. 1009, 1010 (1983), and cases cited.

Since the plaintiff commenced this action for legal malpractice, he has failed to appeal. A Superior Court judge…