Filings Week Ending 2021 May 15

Residential summary process: Filings Report This report examines cases filed recently before reading, for which outcomes were largely unknown. Search Period Start: 2021-05-09 Search Period End: 2021-05-15 Earliest Case: 2021-05-10 Latest Case: 2021-05-14 Total Cases: 406 Total Transfers: 18 -- High-level take-aways: Percentage of landlords for whom attorney is optional: 39.4% Of those, percentage pro se: 50.6% Most common cause: Non-payment Least stable municipality/neighborhood: South Yarmouth Least stable with 10+ filings: New Bedford Least stable with 100+ filings: (not given) Least stable county: Barnstable Cases per day: 67 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 eastern 81 20.0% northeast 77 19.0% western 63 15.5% southeast 55 13.5% central 54 13.3% metro_south 43 10.6% northern berkshire district 5 1.2% cambridge district 3 0.7% chelsea district 3 0.7% fall river district 3 0.7% malden district 3 0.7% barnstable district 2 0.5% somerville district 2 0.5% waltham district 2 0.5% wrentham district 2 0.5% bmc east boston 1 0.2% dedham district 1 0.2% fallmouth district 1 0.2% holyoke district 1 0.2% newburyport district 1 0.2% palmer district 1 0.2% salem district 1 0.2% stoughton district 1 0.2% Party Type (n) Plaintiffs Defendants Corporate Entity 246 2 Natural Person 160 404 Total 406 406 (%) Plaintiffs Defendants Corporate Entity 60.6% 0.5% Natural Person 39.4% 99.5% Total 100.0% 100.0% Plaintiff Representation (n) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 241 5 246 Optional 79 81 160 Total 320 86 406 (%) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 59.4% 1.2% 60.6% Optional 19.5% 20.0% 39.4% Total 78.8% 21.2% 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 2 2 Optional 10 394 404 Total 10 396 406 (%) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 0.0% 0.5% 0.5% Optional 2.5% 97.0% 99.5% Total 2.5% 97.5% 100.0% Number of Adults in Households Count Percent 0 24 5.9% 1 274 67.5% 2 90 22.2% 3 9 2.2% 4 9 2.2% Total 406 100.0% 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 214 52.7% Cause 93 22.9% No Fault 79 19.5% Unknown/Other 19 4.7% Foreclosure 1 0.2% Rate per 100,000 Municipality Residents Count South Yarmouth 43 5 Westwood 41 6 North Adams 36 5 Provincetown 33 1 Dennis Port 31 1 Hatfield 30 1 Walpole 20 5 East Falmouth 17 1 Ashburnham 16 1 New Bedford 15 15 Randolph 15 5 Clinton 14 2 Dorchester 14 13 Hyannis 14 2 Hyde Park 14 5 Stoughton 14 4 Belchertown 13 2 East Wareham 13 3 Fall River 13 12 Halifax 13 1 Hingham 13 3 Jamaica Plain 13 5 Norwood 13 4 West Boylston 13 1 Worcester 13 25 Medford 12 7 Orange 12 1 Salisbury 12 1 Templeton 12 1 Southbridge 11 2 Brockton 10 10 Brighton 9 4 Indian Orchard 9 1 Sandwich 9 2 Carver 8 1 Framingham 8 6 Arlington 7 3 East Boston 7 3 Holliston 7 1 Holyoke 7 3 Marshfield 7 2 Mashpee 7 1 Medway 7 1 Milford 7 2 Millbury 7 1 Northborough 7 1 Revere 7 4 Springfield 7 12 Wilbraham 7 1 Ashland 6 1 Auburn 6 1 Brookline 6 4 Duxbury 6 1 Fairhaven 6 1 Roslindale 6 2 Beverly 5 2 Chelsea 5 2 East Weymouth 5 3 Hudson 5 1 Lowell 5 6 Pembroke 5 1 Roxbury 5 3 Roxbury Crossing 5 3 Sharon 5 1 South Dartmouth 5 2 Winthrop 5 1 Acton 4 1 Belmont 4 1 Dedham 4 1 Dorchester Center 4 4 Fitchburg 4 2 Gardner 4 1 Leominster 4 2 Middleborough 4 1 Boston 3 20 Bridgewater 3 1 Chicopee 3 2 Franklin 3 1 Malden 3 2 Melrose 3 1 Milton 3 1 Natick 3 1 Needham 3 1 Taunton 3 2 Waltham 3 2 Amherst 2 1 Chelmsford 2 1 Everett 2 1 Marlborough 2 1 Pittsfield 2 1 Quincy 2 2 Shrewsbury 2 1 Cambridge 1 2 Haverhill 1 1 Lawrence 1 1 Newton Highlands 1 1 Plymouth 1 1 (not given) 0 110 span 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 67 13 Plymouth 57 25 Norfolk 45 39 Bristol 38 32 Worcester 38 43 Berkshire 37 6 Suffolk 34 69 Hampden 26 19 Hampshire 21 4 Middlesex 16 39 Franklin 9 1 Essex 4 5 Dukes 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/.