For me, the pinnacle of excellent practice and advocacy is appellate practice. Few of you will require my services for this highly specialized area of the law. In summary, Massachusetts has a two tiered appellate court system consisting of the Appeals Court and the Supreme Judicial Court. The appeals court is available hear from appellants who are seeking reversal of the court judgment where there has been an error of law or an abuse of judicial discretion. The Supreme Judicial Court hears cases which are often what are referred to as “first impression” cases. Cases of first impression are those which involve legal issues in which there is no law as yet. The Supreme Judicial Court also will hear cases which contain issues of general import to the citizens of the Commonwealth. If you have gone to trial on your divorce, and the result was unfavorable, that is not a reason to file an appeal. However, sometimes there does exist compelling reason to take the case forward.
The appeals court has also developed a safety valve for those instances when a case has not gone to a final judgment, but there exists a temporary order which, if allowed to remain unaltered, will result in irreparable harm. This is the single justice system that the appeals court has implemented. Every month a justice of the appeals court is assigned single justice duties. Their duties in this respect are not limited to probate court matters. However, I have used the single justice successfully for clients involving procedure used by a probate court judge on a temporary order granting custody of a child. I have used the single justice successfully in a case where the probate judge adopted a procedure for the commencement of a case that was specifically barred by an Appeals Court decision. I have used the single justice in those instances where I feel that my client has been substantially prejudiced by a temporary order, and where the time remaining in the case before it goes to trial and judgment will cause irreparable harm.
In all of these instances, I can help you assess the issues that have been ruled on by the probate court judge, and determine with you whether your situation would be best served by other options available to you, i.e., settlement, further litigation in the probate court, or decide not to proceed further. For me, the most exhilarating and intellectually stimulating part of my practice is appearing before the justices, being well prepared and well versed in my argument, and be able to address coherently and succinctly a sophisticated argument in oral argument. If you decide to consult with me about an appellate issue, and if I find the pursuit meritorious, you will have the right to be present when the court schedules oral arguments, and you will experience the American way of justice.
One final anecdote I want to relate to you is about when I appeared to argue the case Wakefield v. Hegarty. At the hearing in the appeals court, I was told that my case would be the last one argued to our three justice panel for that morning. During that morning, an assembly of people entered the hearing room and sat in the back to observe. The assembly consisted of some forty members of the judiciary from Russia, formerly the Soviet Union. The judges had been speaking in Russian amongst themselves, and because my grandparents originally emigrated from Russia in 1917, I knew some words. I greeted the group in my poor dialect, and was greeted with their smiles and nods. Following the oral arguments on my case, the Appeals Court went into recess, and the judges from Russia congregated around me asking questions about my case. One judge who held court in Siberia told me her experience in hearing cases involving custody and removal cases in Russia. I still smile from my memory of that experience.
Please call me if I can help you in this very interesting area of the law.