Shauna YOUNG v. BRISTOL DIVISION OF the PROBATE AND FAMILY COURT DEPARTMENT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 23.0
The plaintiff, Shauna Young, filed a complaint against the Probate and Family Court in the Superior Court. A Superior Court judge dismissed the complaint for, among other reasons, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See Mass. R. Civ. P. 12 (b) (6), 365 Mass. 754 (1974). The plaintiff's complaint was essentially a collateral attack on orders entered against her in proceedings in the Probate and Family Court. To the extent she was aggrieved by such orders, she must seek relief in the Probate and Family Court or from the appellate courts, not by filing a new complaint in a different department of the trial court. “One seeking review of trial court orders and actions cannot circumvent the ordinary trial and appellate process simply by filing a [complaint] naming the trial court ․ as a defendant.” Johnson v. Commonwealth, 463 Mass. 1006, 1007 (2012). The other types of relief that the plaintiff sought in her complaint, such as the banning of pornography websites and tobacco products, are beyond the scope of relief available in a civil action against the Probate and Family Court. The judge properly dismissed the complaint.
Was this helpful?