Filings Week Ending 2021 April 10

Residential summary process: Filings Report This report examines cases filed recently before reading, for which outcomes were largely unknown. Search Period Start: 2021-04-04 Search Period End: 2021-04-10 Earliest Case: 2021-04-05 Latest Case: 2021-04-10 Total Cases: 380 Total Transfers: 4 -- High-level take-aways: Percentage of landlords for whom attorney is optional: 33.7% Of those, percentage pro se: 62.5% Most common cause: Non-payment Least stable municipality/neighborhood: Gardner Least stable with 10+ filings: Gardner Least stable with 100+ filings: (not given) Least stable county: Berkshire Cases per day: 63 Housing crisis baseline max cases per day (UCL): 130 Housing crisis baseline min cases per day (LCL): 44 The number of filings this period is not statistically different from the pre-pandemic housing crisis baseline. -- Courts (n) Count Percent northeast 79 20.8% eastern 63 16.6% central 57 15.0% western 54 14.2% southeast 48 12.6% metro_south 27 7.1% malden district 9 2.4% pittsfield district 7 1.8% quincy district 5 1.3% barnstable district 4 1.1% lowell district 4 1.1% fall river district 3 0.8% haverhill district 2 0.5% lynn district 2 0.5% northern berkshire district 2 0.5% woburn district 2 0.5% dedham district 1 0.3% fallmouth district 1 0.3% framingham district 1 0.3% leominster district 1 0.3% milford district 1 0.3% orleans district 1 0.3% palmer district 1 0.3% peabody district 1 0.3% somerville district 1 0.3% springfield district 1 0.3% taunton district 1 0.3% waltham district 1 0.3% Party Type (n) Plaintiffs Defendants Corporate Entity 252 7 Natural Person 128 373 Total 380 380 (%) Plaintiffs Defendants Corporate Entity 66.3% 1.8% Natural Person 33.7% 98.2% Total 100.0% 100.0% Plaintiff Representation (n) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 236 16 252 Optional 48 80 128 Total 284 96 380 (%) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 62.1% 4.2% 66.3% Optional 12.6% 21.1% 33.7% Total 74.7% 25.3% 100.0% Defendant Representation Important: Defendants will not have an attorney known to the plaintiff at time of filing unless this is an ongoing matter. 100% pro se is to be expected in all filing reports except to the extent time passes between filing and staff review. See outcomes report for final assessment. (n) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 0 7 7 Optional 10 363 373 Total 10 370 380 (%) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 0.0% 1.8% 1.8% Optional 2.6% 95.5% 98.2% Total 2.6% 97.4% 100.0% Number of Adults in Households Count Percent 0 39 10.3% 1 268 70.5% 2 56 14.7% 3 11 2.9% 4 6 1.6% Total 380 100.0% Note: Households may appear with zero adults due to clerical delay entering known defendants, identity protection obscuring known defendants (e.g., 42 USC Sections 13701 through 1404 Violence Against Women Act), or no adult defendants (e.g., abandonment of minors). Initiating Action Count Percent Non-payment 230 60.5% No Fault 61 16.1% Cause 56 14.7% Unknown/Other 26 6.8% Foreclosure 7 1.8% Rate per 100,000 Municipality Residents Count Gardner 49 10 Avon 45 2 West Dennis 45 1 Osterville 28 1 Marstons Mills 20 1 Framingham 19 13 Hull 19 2 Winchendon 19 2 West Yarmouth 18 1 Athol 17 2 Harwich 16 2 Pittsfield 15 7 Fall River 14 13 Mashpee 14 2 Fitchburg 12 5 Rutland 12 1 Adams 11 1 Attleborough 11 5 Pembroke 11 2 Southbridge 11 2 Southborough 10 1 Taunton 10 6 Westborough 10 2 Everett 9 4 Indian Orchard 9 1 Braintree 8 3 Dedham 8 2 Feeding Hills 8 1 New Bedford 8 8 Worcester 8 15 Centerville 7 1 Hanover 7 1 Leominster 7 3 Marshfield 7 2 Milford 7 2 North Adams 7 1 Raynham 7 1 Stoughton 7 2 Dorchester 6 6 Malden 6 4 Norwood 6 2 Quincy 6 6 Randolph 6 2 Westport 6 1 Brockton 5 5 Jamaica Plain 5 2 Marlborough 5 2 Mattapan 5 2 Plymouth 5 3 Rockland 5 1 Hingham 4 1 Middleborough 4 1 Stoneham 4 1 Wakefield 4 1 Walpole 4 1 Wareham 4 1 Allston 3 1 Bridgewater 3 1 Cambridge 3 4 East Weymouth 3 2 Haverhill 3 2 Lowell 3 4 Needham 3 1 Somerville 3 3 South Weymouth 3 2 West Roxbury 3 1 Weymouth 3 2 Brighton 2 1 Chelsea 2 1 East Boston 2 1 Lynn 2 2 Salem 2 1 South Boston 2 1 Medford 1 1 Revere 1 1 Roxbury Crossing 1 1 (not given) 0 172 Boston 0 2 Rate per 100,000 residents based on 2010 census. Municipalities do not appear if no evictions filed. Where neighborhoods are commonly recognized as municipalities, data appears under the neighborhood rather than the legal entity (e.g., "Roxbury" is separate from "Boston".) Where municipalities have alternate spellings (e.g., Marlboro for Marlborough), totals appear under the long form. Efforts are made to correct clerical errors in the court database, but clerical errors may appear. Rate per 100,000 County Renter Households Count Berkshire 55 9 Barnstable 46 9 Plymouth 46 20 Bristol 41 34 Worcester 40 45 Norfolk 31 27 Middlesex 15 37 Suffolk 10 20 Essex 4 5 Hampden 2 2 Dukes 0 0 Franklin 0 0 Hampshire 0 0 Nantucket 0 0 Rate per 100,000 renter households based on 2019 ACS. Counties appear even if no evictions filed. -- Data Sources (report errors to hello@masslandlords.net): County Data Households Percent Renters Barnstable 96,509 20.0% Berkshire 53,792 30.0% Bristol 220,528 37.3% Dukes 18,146 22.6% Essex 297,898 36.9% Franklin 30,927 34.1% Hampden 179,970 39.5% Hampshire 60,002 30.7% Middlesex 612,366 38.1% Nantucket 11,399 30.8% Norfolk 269,717 31.6% Plymouth 191,041 22.6% Suffolk 309,945 63.7% Worcester 316,162 35.2% County Households: 2019 ACS TableID S1101 County Households and Renters, Dukes and Nantucket: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/dukescountymassachusetts County Households and Renters, Large Counties: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=S11&g=0400000US25.050000&d=ACS%201-Year%20Estimates%20Subject%20Tables&tid=ACSST1Y2019.S1101&hidePreview=true Dukes County Renters: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/dukescountymassachusetts Nantucket County Renters: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/nantucketcountymassachusetts -- Methodology Publicly available records at MassCourts.org are read fully manually at two intervals: 1.) For a filings report, once within approximately one week of filing; 2.) For an outcomes report, once again approximately 12 to 18 months after filing. Cases are searched by 'case type' = 'summary process', party type = 'plaintiff' within date ranges, typically weekly. MassCourts.org displays matches, not cases. X plaintiffs on a single case result in X separate matches. Cases are manually de-duplicated. Where the number of matches exceeds the number displayed (e.g., 'Displaying 100 of 257 total matches.'), date ranges are reduced until all cases may be viewed. If the date range cannot be reduced (i.e., is one day) but matches still exceed the display limit of 100, then two additional passes are taken. First, municipalities are filtered in stages. Second, to capture cases with no municipality entered, the search switches from 'case type' to 'case number', guessing the missing numbers assuming serialized entry. This method results in 'matches' reconciled to case counts. This effort costs more than 1 FTE. Summary spreadsheets are produced by copying exactly what is read. The spreadsheets are processed using proprietary software. Repeated analyses of local spreadsheets does not burden the MassCourts servers. The software is developed using best practices for revision control and regression testing. Limitations: Data are snapshots. As such, we cannot track individual cases over time or produce real-time reports. MassLandlords does not have access to court databases beyond what is published in human readable form at MassCourts.org. As of this report, MassLandlords staff were not considering information available to attorneys (e.g., the contents of notices, discovery, evidence, etc.) but not available to the general public. All data presented here are readily verifiable at MassCourts.org without special permission. Information is not independently verified outside of the court record. For instance, clerical errors in address, omissions of a defendant, etc. are not readily verifiable. As this process matures, reporting algorithms may change. Transfers are counted as new cases. Clerical differences between original case and transfer (e.g., middle initial included then dropped; defendant dropped on transfer; street address spelling changed) as well as the potential for indefinite circular transferring (e.g., foreclosure cases moving between housing, land, and/or superior courts) make it very difficult to programmatically identify continuing matters. -- When Citing This Work, Please Credit: MassLandlords, Inc. Available online at https://masslandlords.net/policy/eviction-data/.