Appeals – Mandamus – Default warrant

Listen to this article

Where a petitioner sought mandamus relief from the issuance of a default warrant, the decision to default the petitioner and issue a warrant was discretionary in nature, so relief in the nature of mandamus is not appropriate.

A single justice’s denial of the petition is affirmed.

“The petitioner, Quantreil Laura, filed a petition pro se in the county court, seeking mandamus relief from the issuance of a default warrant in the Worcester Division of the District Court Department. The petition was denied by a single justice of this court, and Laura appealed. We affirm. …

“As a general matter, ‘the decision to declare a default or to lift a default is … left to the discretion of the judge’ (quotation and citation omitted). Commonwealth v. Gomes, 407 Mass. 206, 211 (1990). … Accordingly, because the decision to default Laura and issue a warrant was discretionary in nature, relief in the nature of mandamus is not appropriate. …

“Insofar as Laura seeks to assert that the District Court lacks jurisdiction over him, it does not appear that he has ever filed a motion to dismiss in the trial court raising such claims. In any event, we have repeatedly held that jurisdictional claims can be adequately addressed in the ordinary course of appeal after the conclusion of trial. … This is not a circumstance in which no alternative remedy is available. …

“In sum, the single justice did not commit a clear error of law or otherwise abuse his discretion in denying relief.”

Laura v. A Justice of the District Court Department (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-119-25) (3 pages) (Rescript) Quantreil Laura, pro se; Nicole Nixon for the respondent (Docket No. SJC-13626) (Oct. 23, 2025).

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.