Your case is unique, but you are not alone.

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know your judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know your attorney

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know your court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes and we don’t recommend changing your attorney — that’s a conversation for you and them. We just show you what the record already says.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase
Photo of Massachusetts Unified County

Court

Massachusetts Unified County

Massachusetts

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2023-08-17
Status Closed
Type Eqa Equitable Action Involving Any Right, Title Or Interest In Land, G.l. Chapter 185, 1 (k)
Docket 44 entries
Disposition judgment of dismissal

Parties

Plaintiff Brown, Gloria
Defendant Brown, Sharyon

Docket Entries

  1. n accordance with Massachusetts Appeals Court Rule 19.0 Dismissals of Appeals and Reports in all Cases for Lack of Prosecution (copy enclosed), you are hereby given notice that the above-referenced appeal has been dismissed for lack of prosecution for the following reason: Brief/appendix not received or status report not filed.
  2. ase assigned to the Average Track per Land Court Standing Order 1:04.
  3. and Court miscellaneous filing fee Dismissed Type: Indigency Dismissed Date: 08/17/2023 Dismissed Amount: 240.00 Dismissing Clerk / Judge: Patterson, Deborah J. Comments: Fee Waived - Indigency [Thursday, August 17, 2023 2:30 PM] Dismissed By: SHEGARTY
  4. and Court surcharge Dismissed Type: Indigency Dismissed Date: 08/17/2023 Dismissed Amount: 15.00 Dismissing Clerk / Judge: Patterson, Deborah J. Comments: Fee Waived - Indigency [Thursday, August 17, 2023 2:30 PM] Dismissed By: SHEGARTY
  5. niform Counsel Certificate for Civil Cases filed by Plaintiff.
  6. and Court summons Dismissed Type: Indigency Dismissed Date: 08/17/2023 Dismissed Amount: 5.00 Dismissing Clerk / Judge: Patterson, Deborah J. Comments: Fee Waived - Indigency [Thursday, August 17, 2023 2:30 PM] Dismissed By: SHEGARTY
  7. ffidavit of Indigency, filed.
  8. ppearance of Pro Se for Gloria Brown, filed
  9. etermination Regarding Indigency, issued Judge: Patterson, Deborah J.
  10. he case has been assigned to the A Track. Notice sent. Notice of Judge and Track Assignment sent to Pro Se by mail also.
  11. vent Scheduled Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Event: Case Management Conference Date: 09/21/2023 Time: 10:30 AM
  12. ummons returned to Court with service on Sharyon Brown filed.
  13. mail from Ms. Gloria Brown, filed.
  14. otion for General Default G.L.c.185, 42 and G.L.c. 60, 67, filed.
  15. he Court DIRECTS the Recorder to enter the default of defendant Sharyon Brown in this action. The Court CONVERTS the September 21, 2023, case-management conference in this matter to a status conference. The Court EXCUSES Gloria Brown from filing a case-management conference statement, but she still must attend the September 21, 2023, conference by telephone. SO ORDERED. Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Plaintiff: Gloria Brown 80 Seminole Street, Hyde Park, MA 02136 Sent On: 09/18/2023 15:31:51 Notice of Docket Entry sent to Pro Se Gloria Brown by email.
  16. vent Resulted: Case Management Conference scheduled on: 09/21/2023 10:30 AM Has been: Continued Comments: CONVERTED to a Status Conference Hon. Michael D. Vhay, Presiding
  17. efendant Sharyon Brown defaulted pursuant to Mass. R.Civ. P. 55(a). (Patterson, Rec.)
  18. cheduled Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Event: Status Conference Date: 09/21/2023 Time: 10:30 AM
  19. he Court has received Gloria Brown's Motion for General Default. The Court DENIES the motion because by order dated September 19, 2023, the Court has already defaulted defendant Sharyon Brown. The Court will discuss with Gloria Brown, at tomorrow's status conference, the next steps for her to obtain a judgment against Sharyon. SO ORDERED. Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Plaintiff: Gloria Brown [email protected] Sent On: 09/20/2023 09:49:42
  20. vent Resulted: Status Conference scheduled on: 09/21/2023 10:30 AM Has been: Held via telephone Hon. Michael D. Vhay, Presiding
  21. elephonic status conference held. Gloria Brown appeared representing herself. No other parties appeared. After hearing from Ms. Brown, the Court ORDERS her to file by September 28, 2023 an amended complaint naming CareOne Management LLC and CareOne at Randolph as defendants. SO ORDERED. Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Plaintiff: Gloria Brown [email protected] Sent On: 09/21/2023 11:55:14
  22. mail Request for Clarification of the Court's Order, filed.
  23. s. Brown has asked for clarification of the Court's order directing her to amend her complaint. In order to comply with that order, Ms. Brown needs to take the information she put in her first complaint and add to that information the following: (a) the names and addresses of both Care One companies, which she should describe as "defendants" in the case (in addition to Sharyon Brown); and (b) a statement that she is naming the Care One companies as "defendants" in the case only because they have recorded Writs of Attachment against the Brown property. Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Plaintiff: Gloria Brown [email protected] Sent On: 09/21/2023 14:14:15
  24. otice of Appeal by Gloria Brown to the filed.
  25. otion to Stay Pending Appeal, filed.
  26. otice of Appeal by Gloria Brown to the Appeals Court filed.
  27. he Court has received Gloria Brown's Notice of Appeal and Motion to Stay Pending Appeal. The Court DISMISSES Ms. Brown's Notice of Appeal and DENIES her Motion to Stay Pending Appeal. The Notice of Appeal challenges this Court's September 21, 2023, order directing Ms. Brown to amend her complaint. "If a party wishes to seek appellate review of an interlocutory order before the entry of final judgment the party generally only has two alternatives. First, the party may ask the judge under Mass. R. Civ. P. 64(a) to report the interlocutory finding or order to the appeals Court, and the judge may do so where he or she concludes that the finding or order 'so affects the merits of the controversy that the matter ought to be determined by the [A]ppeals [C]ourt before any further proceedings in the trial court.'" Patel v. Martin, 481 Mass. 29, 31-32 (2018), quoting Mass. R. Civ. P. 64(a). Ms. Brown has not asked the Court for authorization to appeal under Rule 64(a). Alternately, "the party has the right to petition for relief under G.L. c. 231, 118, from a single justice of the Appeals Court, who may, in his or her discretion, grant the relief." Patel, 481 Mass. at 32. Ms. Brown has not petitioned for relief under sec. 118 either. See also Massachusetts Appeals Court Rule 20 (listing the contents of a petition for relief pursuant to G.L. c. 231, 118). Since Ms. Brown has followed neither route for seeking review of the Court's September 21, 2023, order, it's appropriate for the Court to dismiss Ms. Brown's Notice of Appeal. See Maciuca v. Papit, 31 Mass. App. Ct. 540, 544 (1991); Crystal Construction Corp. v. Hartigan, 56 Mass. App. Ct. 324, 331 n. 5 (2002). Since the Notice of Appeal is ineffective, Ms. Brown's Motion to Stay Pending Appeal is moot. Instead, the Court ORDERS Ms. Brown to appear by telephone on October 20, 2023, at 2:00 PM, to show cause for her failure to comply with the Court's September 21, 2023 order. A separate notice of telephonic hearing will issue. The Court ADVISES Ms. Brown that if she fails to appear for the October 20, 2023, hearing, or fails to demonstrate good cause for not obeying the Court's September 21, 2023, order, the Court may dismiss her complaint for failing to name indispensable parties. See Massachusetts Rule of Civil Procedure 19(b). SO ORDERED. Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Plaintiff: Gloria Brown [email protected] Sent On: 10/16/2023 08:32:14
  28. cheduled Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Event: Hearing Date: 10/20/2023 Time: 02:00 PM
  29. vent Resulted: Hearing scheduled on: 10/20/2023 02:00 PM Has been: Held via telephone Hon. Michael D. Vhay, Presiding
  30. elephonic show cause hearing held. Ms. Gloria Brown did not appear, and hence she has not shown good cause for failing to obey the Court's September 21, 2023, order requiring her to amend her complaint. The Court thus DISMISSES the case for lack of prosecution. A separate judgment of dismissal will issue. SO ORDERED. Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Plaintiff: Gloria Brown [email protected] Sent On: 10/20/2023 14:32:35
  31. udgment of Dismissal, entered. (Copy emailed to Gloria Brown) Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D.
  32. laintiff Gloria Brown Motion to Vacate Judgment filed. Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Judgment with Affidavit and Exhibits
  33. he Court has received Ms. Brown's motion for relief from judgment. The Court ORDERS Ms. Brown to appear by telephone on November 9, 2023, at 9:00 AM for a hearing on HER motion. A separate notice of telephone conference will issue, by both e-mail sent from the Sessions Clerk's e-mail address as well as regular mail. At the telephone conference, Ms. Brown must be prepared to discuss (a) whether it is appropriate for her to receive notices in this case by e-mail, were the Court to vacate its judgment of dismissal and reinstate Ms. Brown's case; and (b) the earliest date she would be able to comply with the Court's September 21, 2023, order directing her to amend her complaint, were the Court to reinstate the case. SO ORDERED. Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Plaintiff: Gloria Brown [email protected] Sent On: 11/03/2023 15:16:52 Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Plaintiff: Gloria Brown 80 Seminole Street, Hyde Park, MA 02136 Sent On: 11/03/2023 15:18:01
  34. cheduled Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Event: Hearing Date: 11/09/2023 Time: 09:00 AM
  35. laintiff's Motion for a Brief Continuance Time Sensitive, filed and ALLOWED (Vhay, J.). Notice of Docket Entry sent to Pro Se by email.
  36. vent Resulted: Hearing scheduled on: 11/09/2023 09:00 AM Has been: Rescheduled For the following reason: Request of Plaintiff(s) Hon. Michael D. Vhay, Presiding
  37. cheduled Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Event: Hearing Date: 11/17/2023 Time: 04:00 PM
  38. vent Resulted: Hearing scheduled on: 11/17/2023 04:00 PM Has been: Held via telephone Hon. Michael D. Vhay, Presiding
  39. elephonic hearing on Gloria Brown's motion for relief from judgment held. Ms. Brown appeared representing herself. After hearing from Ms. Brown, the Court DENIED her motion, as she stated she's unwilling to comply with the Court's September 2023 order directing her to name the Care One entities as parties to the lawsuit. SO ORDERED. Judge: Vhay, Hon. Michael D. Notice of Docket Entry was generated and sent to: Plaintiff: Gloria Brown [email protected] Sent On: 11/17/2023 18:06:34
  40. otice of Appeal by Gloria Brown to the Appeals Court filed.
  41. otice of Appeal by Gloria Brown to the Appeals Court filed.
  42. otice of Assembly of Record on Appeal sent to the Clerk of the Appeals Court.
  43. otice of Assembly of Record on Appeal sent to all counsel of record.
  44. ase entered in the Appeals Court as Case No. 2024-P-0035. In accordance with Massachusetts Rule of Appellate Procedure 10(a)(3), please note that the above-referenced case was entered in this Court on January 11, 2024.

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

One-time payment, no subscription. Reports describe past public court activity — they don’t predict outcomes and they aren’t legal advice.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

Featured in Forbes, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Above The Law, American Bar Association, and more