PIERRE v. GRADY (2025)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 23.0

Donna Pierre (mother) appeals from a June 3, 2022 contempt judgment, in which she was found guilty of contempt for refusing to allow John Grady (father) to have court-ordered parenting time with their child. The contempt judgment further provided that (1) the father was entitled to receive at least ten hours of make-up parenting time, to be exercised by extending his visits with the child by two hours (or by extending one visit by an additional day); and (2) that the mother had to pay the father's attorney's fees in the amount of $500.

As a result of mother's failure to comply with the requirements of the Massachusetts Rules of Appellate Procedure, we are unable to identify, let alone address, any alleged claims of error. “An appellant's brief must set forth an ‘argument, which shall contain the contentions of the appellant with respect to the issues presented, and the reasons therefor[e], with citations to the authorities, statutes and parts of the record relied on’ ” (citation omitted). Cameron v. Carelli, 39 Mass. App. Ct. 81, 85 (1995). See Mass. R. A. P. 16 (a), as appearing in 481 Mass. 1628 (2019). The mother's brief, which does not contain any citations to relevant authority or any argument that addresses the propriety of the contempt judgment, simply sets forth the history of the parties’ conflicts and grievances. In short, the brief does not rise to the level of acceptable appellate argument, and, as a result, all arguments are waived. See Cameron, supra at 85-86.

Judgment affirmed.