Opinion
No. 16–P–441.
12-27-2016
STRUCTURE MANAGEMENT v. Theodore PANYERE.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
To the extent we understand the argument of the defendant tenant, Theodore Panyere, it is to the effect that the Housing Court judge erroneously determined that Panyere did not pay all or some portion of his rent due for some period. Panyere's brief states that he did not have proof of payment of rent until after trial and he includes such proof in support of his appeal. The landlord did not file a brief. Panyere has not provided any of the evidence considered by the Housing Court judge, any report of the evidence, or a trial transcript. In other words, "[t]he difficulty we have in evaluating ... [this] contention[ ] is that we have absolutely no idea what transpired [below] .... Without a record of the testimony or representations at the hearing, we have no basis for concluding that the evidence did not support the judge's findings." Arch Med. Assocs., Inc. v. Bartlett Health Enterprises, Inc., 32 Mass.App.Ct. 404, 406 (1992). Accordingly, we affirm the Housing Court judgment from which Panyere appeals.
Although self-represented, Panyere is held to the same practice standards as a licensed attorney. See Mains v. Commonwealth, 433 Mass. 30, 36 (2000). As the appellant, it is Panyere's duty to provide the court with all portions of the record essential for review. See Shawmut Community Bank, N.A. v. Zagami, 30 Mass.App.Ct. 371, 372–373 (1991), S. C., 411 Mass. 807 (1992) ; Cameron v. Carelli, 39 Mass.App.Ct. 81, 83–84 (1995). It is also Panyere's duty "to assist the court with [meaningful] argument and appropriate citation of authority." Middleborough Gas & Elec. Dept. v. Middleborough, 48 Mass.App.Ct. 427, 434 (2000), quoting from Lolos v. Berlin, 338 Mass. 10, 14 (1958). See also Mass.R.A .P. 16(a)(4), as amended, 367 Mass. 921 (1975); Mass.R.A.P. 18(a), as amended, 426 Mass. 1601 (1997).
--------
So ordered.