Former homeowners lost their appeal of a post-foreclosure eviction because their brief did not follow the appellate rules. The Appeals Court held that, without real legal argument and citations to law and a proper record, every issue they raised was waived, and it affirmed the judgment for the bank. This is an unpublished Appeals Court decision under Rule 23.0, which courts may cite as persuasive but not as binding precedent.
What happened
After a foreclosure, the bank brought a summary process (eviction) case in Housing Court to take possession of a home in Maynard that the defendants had owned and lived in. The Housing Court granted summary judgment for the bank and awarded it possession. On appeal, the former owners challenged rulings by five different Housing Court judges at different stages. They raised claims about personal jurisdiction, service of process, due process, constitutional violations and judicial misconduct. Their main point was that summary judgment was wrong because there was a genuine dispute over which side had the superior right to possession.
What the court decided
The Appeals Court affirmed. HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Goddard, No. 24-P-463 (Mass. App. Ct. June 2, 2025) (Rule 23.0 decision).
The court started with the basic rule. An appellant’s brief must state its arguments on the issues presented, the reasons for them, and citations to the authorities, statutes and parts of the record relied on. Selmark Assocs., Inc. v. Ehrlich, 467 Mass. 525 (2014). Today that requirement appears in Mass. R. A. P. 16 (a) (9) (A), and an appellate court need not decide issues that are not argued in the brief.
The former owners did not cite any relevant legal authority for their arguments. Instead, they relied on snippets from what appeared to be unofficial transcriptions of hearings. The court said those passages were mostly words and phrases with no clear meaning or connection to any issue in the appeal. The owners also cited an “Equal Access to Justice Act” that they said protects people without money from losing access to the courts. The court said it knew of no such Massachusetts law, and the federal statute by that name applies to litigation involving the federal government, so it had no apparent relevance.
Because the brief did not meet the rules, the court held the owners waived all the issues they raised. It did not reach whether there was a real dispute about the right to possession.
What this means for you
An appeal is not a new trial. The Appeals Court does not hear witnesses or take a fresh look at the whole case. It decides whether the trial court made a legal error, and only on the issues your brief actually argues. If your brief lists complaints without explaining the law and pointing to the record, the court can treat every issue as given up.
That matters most in post-foreclosure cases, where the former owner often has to show a real problem with the foreclosure or the bank’s title to stay in the home. Even a strong point can be lost if it is not argued correctly. Raising many scattered claims against many judges usually hurts more than it helps.
These rules apply whether or not you have a lawyer. The court will not build your arguments for you.
What to do now
- Pick your strongest one or two issues and focus the brief on them.
- For each issue, explain what the judge got wrong, cite Massachusetts cases, statutes or rules, and point to the page of the record that shows it.
- Order official transcripts of the hearings you rely on. Do not rely on your own notes or recordings.
- Check that every law you cite actually applies to your case and your court.
- Talk to an appellate lawyer early. Deadlines to file the notice of appeal and the brief are strict.
If this is your situation, call Doubleday Law at (617) 575-2006 or tell us what happened. Housing Court deadlines are short.
