Legal Opinion

Hurley v. Superior Court Department

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 10, 1997PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The petitioner next filed a petition in the county court seeking a variety of relief in the nature of mandamus and pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3. A single justice of this court denied the petition without a hearing. The petitioner has appealed to the full court.

Thomas Hurley, pro se. William J. Meade, Assistant Attorney General, for the defendants.

1. The petitioner sought from the single justice, among other things, review of the rulings by the trial judge and the single justice of the Appeals Court concerning his request for transcripts. The applicable statute, G. L. c. 261, § 27D, plainly…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Leaster v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
  2. Commonwealth v. PopeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984
  3. Gos v. BrownsteinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1988
  4. Callahan v. Board of Bar OverseersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1994

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. BirchallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2009
  2. Hunt v. Appeals CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
  3. Commonwealth v. SamuelsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2010
  4. Commonwealth v. BarrosMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2011
  5. Foxworth v. St. AmandMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2010

11 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