Legal Opinion

Bloise v. Bloise

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 26, 2002PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Anthony Bloise appeals from the denial, by a single justice of this court, of his “interlocutory motion to compel recusal” of a judge in an underlying case pending in the District Court. The single justice considered Bloise’s filing in essence to be a petition pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3, and denied it without a hearing. We affirm.

Bloise has filed a memorandum and appendix pursuant to S.J.C. Rule 2:21, as amended, 434 Mass. 1301 (2001). He has not demonstrated, however, as the rule requires, that review of the underlying District Court order, i.e., the judge’s denial of Bloise’s recusal…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Gorod v. TabachnickMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
  2. Zullo v. GoguenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1996
  3. Milton v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
  4. Doten v. Plymouth Division of the Probate & Family Court DepartmentMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
  5. Parekh v. ParekhMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1996

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Dowd v. Town of DedhamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2003
  2. In re DasentMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006
  3. Myrick v. Superior Court DepartmentMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2018
  4. Culley v. CatoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2011
  5. Ewing v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008

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

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

Powered by the Exa API