Filings Week Ending 2021 March 13

Residential summary process: Filings Report This report examines cases filed recently before reading, for which outcomes were largely unknown. Search Period Start: 2021-03-07 Search Period End: 2021-03-13 Earliest Case: 2021-03-08 Latest Case: 2021-03-12 Total Cases: 435 Total Transfers: 10 -- High-level take-aways: Percentage of landlords for whom attorney is optional: 38.2% Of those, percentage pro se: 53.0% Most common cause: Non-payment Least stable municipality/neighborhood: Harwich Port Least stable with 10+ filings: Fall River Least stable with 100+ filings: (not given) Least stable county: Plymouth Cases per day: 72 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 91 20.9% western 72 16.6% central 68 15.6% eastern 61 14.0% southeast 54 12.4% metro_south 36 8.3% lynn district 12 2.8% bmc west roxbury 7 1.6% quincy district 5 1.1% cambridge district 3 0.7% lowell district 3 0.7% northern berkshire district 3 0.7% fall river district 2 0.5% pittsfield district 2 0.5% wareham district 2 0.5% barnstable district 1 0.2% bmc roxbury 1 0.2% concord district 1 0.2% dedham district 1 0.2% fallmouth district 1 0.2% framingham district 1 0.2% lawrence district 1 0.2% malden district 1 0.2% new bedford district 1 0.2% newburyport district 1 0.2% orleans district 1 0.2% southern berkshire district 1 0.2% woburn district 1 0.2% wrentham district 1 0.2% Party Type (n) Plaintiffs Defendants Corporate Entity 269 7 Natural Person 166 428 Total 435 435 (%) Plaintiffs Defendants Corporate Entity 61.8% 1.6% Natural Person 38.2% 98.4% Total 100.0% 100.0% Plaintiff Representation (n) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 252 17 269 Optional 78 88 166 Total 330 105 435 (%) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 57.9% 3.9% 61.8% Optional 17.9% 20.2% 38.2% Total 75.9% 24.1% 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 4 424 428 Total 4 431 435 (%) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 0.0% 1.6% 1.6% Optional 0.9% 97.5% 98.4% Total 0.9% 99.1% 100.0% Number of Adults in Households Count Percent 0 39 9.0% 1 305 70.1% 2 72 16.6% 3 12 2.8% 4 7 1.6% Total 435 100.0% 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 256 58.9% No Fault 78 17.9% Cause 72 16.6% Unknown/Other 25 5.7% Foreclosure 4 0.9% Rate per 100,000 Municipality Residents Count Harwich Port 57 1 Lanesborough 32 1 Dennis Port 31 1 Dighton 28 2 East Sandwich 28 1 Edgartown 24 1 Roslindale 24 7 Blackstone 22 2 Fall River 22 20 Forestdale 22 1 Hubbardston 22 1 Leominster 22 9 Uxbridge 22 3 Rochester 19 1 Warren 19 1 Abington 18 3 Hingham 18 4 Athol 17 2 East Falmouth 17 1 Southbridge 17 3 Brockton 14 14 Hanover 14 2 North Adams 14 2 Worcester 14 26 Lynn 13 12 Westminster 13 1 Fitchburg 12 5 Middleborough 12 3 New Bedford 12 12 Randolph 12 4 Sutton 11 1 Brewster 10 1 Canton 9 2 Groton 9 1 Lunenburg 9 1 Maynard 9 1 Belmont 8 2 Dudley 8 1 Framingham 8 6 Mattapan 8 3 Quincy 8 8 Spencer 8 1 Wakefield 8 2 Centerville 7 1 Clinton 7 1 Hyannis 7 1 Mashpee 7 1 Milton 7 2 Franklin 6 2 Needham 6 2 Westwood 6 1 Hudson 5 1 Roxbury 5 3 Sudbury 5 1 Dedham 4 1 Gardner 4 1 Wareham 4 1 Bridgewater 3 1 Dorchester 3 3 Lowell 3 4 Marshfield 3 1 Milford 3 1 Norwood 3 1 Peabody 3 2 Stoughton 3 1 Taunton 3 2 Wellesley 3 1 Braintree 2 1 East Boston 2 1 Holyoke 2 1 Hyde Park 2 1 Pittsfield 2 1 Salem 2 1 South Dartmouth 2 1 Woburn 2 1 Cambridge 1 2 Dorchester Center 1 1 Haverhill 1 1 Lawrence 1 1 Plymouth 1 1 Springfield 1 2 (not given) 0 199 Boston 0 6 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 Plymouth 71 31 Worcester 53 60 Barnstable 46 9 Bristol 44 37 Norfolk 30 26 Berkshire 24 4 Dukes 24 1 Essex 15 17 Suffolk 12 25 Middlesex 9 21 Hampden 4 3 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/.