Filings Week Ending 2021 September 04

Residential summary process: Filings Report This report examines cases filed recently before reading, for which outcomes were largely unknown. Search Period Start: 2021-08-29 Search Period End: 2021-09-04 Earliest Case: 2021-08-30 Latest Case: 2021-09-03 Total Cases: 345 Total Transfers: 10 -- High-level take-aways: Percentage of landlords for whom attorney is optional: 39.1% Of those, percentage pro se: 49.6% Most common cause: Non-payment Least stable municipality/neighborhood: West Hyannisport Least stable with 10+ filings: Randolph Least stable with 100+ filings: n/a Least stable county: Nantucket Cases per day: 57 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 63 18.3% western 62 18.0% central 57 16.5% eastern 54 15.7% southeast 41 11.9% metro_south 25 7.2% quincy district 7 2.0% chelsea district 4 1.2% pittsfield district 3 0.9% attleboro district 2 0.6% bmc east boston 2 0.6% cambridge district 2 0.6% framingham district 2 0.6% lawrence district 2 0.6% nantucket district 2 0.6% waltham district 2 0.6% ayer district 1 0.3% bmc central 1 0.3% fall river district 1 0.3% gloucester district 1 0.3% lowell district 1 0.3% lynn district 1 0.3% milford district 1 0.3% newburyport district 1 0.3% plymouth district 1 0.3% somerville district 1 0.3% stoughton district 1 0.3% wareham district 1 0.3% westfield district 1 0.3% woburn district 1 0.3% wrentham district 1 0.3% Party Type (n) Plaintiffs Defendants Corporate Entity 210 1 Natural Person 135 344 Total 345 345 (%) Plaintiffs Defendants Corporate Entity 60.9% 0.3% Natural Person 39.1% 99.7% Total 100.0% 100.0% Plaintiff Representation (n) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 200 10 210 Optional 68 67 135 Total 268 77 345 (%) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 58.0% 2.9% 60.9% Optional 19.7% 19.4% 39.1% Total 77.7% 22.3% 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 1 0 1 Optional 5 339 344 Total 6 339 345 (%) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 0.3% 0.0% 0.3% Optional 1.4% 98.3% 99.7% Total 1.7% 98.3% 100.0% Number of Adults in Households Count Percent 0 25 7.2% 1 233 67.5% 2 74 21.4% 3 10 2.9% 4 3 0.9% Total 345 100.0% 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 208 60.3% Cause 68 19.7% No Fault 63 18.3% Foreclosure 6 1.7% Unknown/Other 0 0.0% Rate per 100,000 Municipality Residents Count West Hyannisport 555 1 West Townsend 47 1 Ayer 40 3 Randolph 34 11 Southbridge 23 4 South Grafton 22 1 Westborough 21 4 Bolton 20 1 Eastham 20 1 Marion 20 1 Gardner 19 4 Nantucket 19 2 Athol 17 2 Chelsea 17 6 Spencer 17 2 Marlborough 15 6 East Boston 14 6 Fall River 13 12 Halifax 13 1 Georgetown 12 1 Lowell 12 13 Millis 12 1 Westport 12 2 Dorchester 11 11 New Bedford 11 11 Revere 11 6 Townsend 11 1 Webster 11 2 Winthrop 11 2 Dorchester Center 10 10 Lawrence 10 8 Haverhill 9 6 Leominster 9 4 Lunenburg 9 1 Quincy 9 9 South Easton 9 1 Worcester 9 18 Carver 8 1 Dudley 8 1 Mansfield 8 2 Mattapan 8 3 Pepperell 8 1 Tyngsborough 8 1 Bedford 7 1 Beverly 7 3 Billerica 7 3 Bridgewater 7 2 Millbury 7 1 Northborough 7 1 Stoughton 7 2 Attleborough 6 3 Auburn 6 1 Franklin 6 2 Methuen 6 3 Northbridge 6 1 Brockton 5 5 Concord 5 1 Grafton 5 1 Hudson 5 1 Norton 5 1 Pembroke 5 1 Woburn 5 2 Lynn 4 4 Pittsfield 4 2 Wakefield 4 1 Allston 3 1 Andover 3 1 Danvers 3 1 Dracut 3 1 Gloucester 3 1 Marshfield 3 1 Milford 3 1 Peabody 3 2 Plymouth 3 2 Taunton 3 2 Tewksbury 3 1 Waltham 3 2 Arlington 2 1 Everett 2 1 Framingham 2 2 Jamaica Plain 2 1 Salem 2 1 Westfield 2 1 Boston 1 11 Brookline 1 1 Malden 1 1 Medford 1 1 North Weymouth 1 1 Roxbury 1 1 Roxbury Crossing 1 1 Somerville 1 1 South Weymouth 1 1 (not given) 0 73 Cambridge 0 1 span 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 Nantucket 56 2 Worcester 44 50 Bristol 41 34 Norfolk 32 28 Plymouth 32 14 Suffolk 29 59 Essex 28 31 Middlesex 20 47 Berkshire 12 2 Barnstable 10 2 Hampden 1 1 Dukes 0 0 Franklin 0 0 Hampshire 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/.