Filings Week Ending 2022 April 02

Residential summary process: Filings Report This report examines cases filed recently before reading, for which outcomes were largely unknown. Search Period Start: 2022-03-27 Search Period End: 2022-04-02 Earliest Case: 2022-03-28 Latest Case: 2022-04-01 Total Cases: 443 Total Transfers: 12 -- High-level take-aways: Percentage of landlords for whom attorney is optional: 26.2% Of those, percentage pro se: 58.6% Most common cause: Non-payment Least stable municipality/neighborhood: Lenox Dale Least stable with 10+ filings: Worcester Least stable with 100+ filings: (not given) Least stable county: Barnstable Cases per day: 73 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 107 24.2% western 72 16.3% eastern 64 14.4% central 61 13.8% southeast 46 10.4% metro_south 29 6.5% waltham district 8 1.8% framingham district 7 1.6% quincy district 7 1.6% pittsfield district 5 1.1% lynn district 4 0.9% malden district 3 0.7% newburyport district 3 0.7% attleboro district 2 0.5% barnstable district 2 0.5% bmc west roxbury 2 0.5% cambridge district 2 0.5% hingham district 2 0.5% lowell district 2 0.5% salem district 2 0.5% springfield district 2 0.5% bmc brighton 1 0.2% brockton district 1 0.2% concord district 1 0.2% fallmouth district 1 0.2% newton district 1 0.2% northampton district 1 0.2% orange district 1 0.2% orleans district 1 0.2% southern berkshire district 1 0.2% uxbridge district 1 0.2% wrentham district 1 0.2% Party Type (n) Plaintiffs Defendants Corporate Entity 327 4 Natural Person 116 439 Total 443 443 (%) Plaintiffs Defendants Corporate Entity 73.8% 0.9% Natural Person 26.2% 99.1% Total 100.0% 100.0% Plaintiff Representation (n) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 316 11 327 Optional 48 68 116 Total 364 79 443 (%) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 71.3% 2.5% 73.8% Optional 10.8% 15.3% 26.2% Total 82.2% 17.8% 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 4 4 Optional 4 435 439 Total 4 439 443 (%) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 0.0% 0.9% 0.9% Optional 0.9% 98.2% 99.1% Total 0.9% 99.1% 100.0% Number of Adults in Households Count Percent 0 28 6.3% 1 334 75.4% 2 68 15.3% 3 7 1.6% 4 5 1.1% 6 1 0.2% Total 443 100.0% 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 278 62.8% Cause 98 22.1% No Fault 55 12.4% Foreclosure 12 2.7% Unknown/Other 0 0.0% Rate per 100,000 Municipality Residents Count Lenox Dale 214 1 Becket 56 1 Athol 34 4 Provincetown 33 1 Cotuit 30 1 Randolph 28 9 Forestdale 22 1 Oak Bluffs 22 1 Worcester 19 36 Yarmouth Port 19 1 Amesbury 18 3 West Yarmouth 18 1 East Falmouth 17 1 Sharon 17 3 Southbridge 17 3 Chatham 16 1 Bridgewater 15 4 East Taunton 15 1 Roxbury 15 9 Fall River 14 13 Mashpee 14 2 Whitinsville 14 1 Dorchester 13 12 Framingham 13 9 Westminster 13 1 Watertown 12 4 Danvers 11 3 Douglas 11 1 Marshfield 11 3 New Bedford 11 11 Rockland 11 2 Stoughton 11 3 Auburndale 10 1 Brewster 10 1 Jamaica Plain 10 4 Attleborough 9 4 Holbrook 9 1 Revere 9 5 South Easton 9 1 Wrentham 9 1 North Dartmouth 8 2 Pittsfield 8 4 Quincy 8 8 Spencer 8 1 Cambridge 7 8 Clinton 7 1 Marlborough 7 3 Northborough 7 1 Oxford 7 1 Fairhaven 6 1 Whitman 6 1 Chelsea 5 2 Foxborough 5 1 Hudson 5 1 Lynn 5 5 Shrewsbury 5 2 Taunton 5 3 Webster 5 1 Brockton 4 4 Dorchester Center 4 4 Fitchburg 4 2 Gardner 4 1 Sandwich 4 1 Brookline 3 2 East Walpole 3 1 Gloucester 3 1 Lexington 3 1 Medford 3 2 Melrose 3 1 Natick 3 1 Roslindale 3 1 West Roxbury 3 1 Billerica 2 1 Boston 2 13 Braintree 2 1 Brighton 2 1 East Boston 2 1 Everett 2 1 Hyde Park 2 1 Mattapan 2 1 Salem 2 1 South Boston 2 1 Malden 1 1 Somerville 1 1 Springfield 1 2 Waltham 1 1 Weymouth 1 1 (not given) 0 180 Lowell 0 1 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 Barnstable 56 11 Worcester 50 56 Bristol 43 36 Berkshire 37 6 Norfolk 36 31 Plymouth 32 14 Suffolk 28 56 Dukes 24 1 Middlesex 15 37 Essex 11 13 Hampden 2 2 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. Methodology changes: 2022-03: Where docket history shows judgment and/or execution, but case has not been disposed, infer judgment and/or execution. -- When Citing This Work, Please Credit: MassLandlords, Inc. Available online at https://masslandlords.net/policy/eviction-data/.