Filings Week Ending 2022 February 26

Residential summary process: Filings Report This report examines cases filed recently before reading, for which outcomes were largely unknown. Search Period Start: 2022-02-20 Search Period End: 2022-02-26 Earliest Case: 2022-02-21 Latest Case: 2022-02-25 Total Cases: 367 Total Transfers: 7 -- High-level take-aways: Percentage of landlords for whom attorney is optional: 31.1% Of those, percentage pro se: 41.2% Most common cause: Non-payment Least stable municipality/neighborhood: Chilmark Least stable with 10+ filings: Framingham Least stable with 100+ filings: n/a Least stable county: Dukes Cases per day: 61 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 72 19.6% central 58 15.8% southeast 53 14.4% western 46 12.5% eastern 33 9.0% metro_south 30 8.2% framingham district 12 3.3% quincy district 10 2.7% chicopee district 6 1.6% milford district 5 1.4% new bedford district 5 1.4% barnstable district 4 1.1% bmc east boston 4 1.1% edgartown district 4 1.1% fall river district 3 0.8% attleboro district 2 0.5% chelsea district 2 0.5% somerville district 2 0.5% waltham district 2 0.5% wareham district 2 0.5% woburn district 2 0.5% bmc brighton 1 0.3% bmc central 1 0.3% bmc west roxbury 1 0.3% clinton district 1 0.3% fallmouth district 1 0.3% haverhill district 1 0.3% lawrence district 1 0.3% newburyport district 1 0.3% northern berkshire district 1 0.3% peabody district 1 0.3% Party Type (n) Plaintiffs Defendants Corporate Entity 253 0 Natural Person 114 367 Total 367 367 (%) Plaintiffs Defendants Corporate Entity 68.9% 0.0% Natural Person 31.1% 100.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% Plaintiff Representation (n) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 252 1 253 Optional 67 47 114 Total 319 48 367 (%) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 68.7% 0.3% 68.9% Optional 18.3% 12.8% 31.1% Total 86.9% 13.1% 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 0 0 Optional 1 366 367 Total 1 366 367 (%) Has Attorney Pro Se Total Required 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Optional 0.3% 99.7% 100.0% Total 0.3% 99.7% 100.0% Number of Adults in Households Count Percent 0 24 6.5% 1 240 65.4% 2 81 22.1% 3 13 3.5% 4 6 1.6% 5 3 0.8% Total 367 100.0% 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 223 60.8% Cause 79 21.5% No Fault 51 13.9% Foreclosure 13 3.5% Unknown/Other 1 0.3% Rate per 100,000 Municipality Residents Count Chilmark 115 1 West Tisbury 72 2 Vineyard Haven 52 1 Framingham 46 32 Fall River 27 24 Whitman 27 4 Cohasset 26 2 South Yarmouth 25 3 Blackstone 22 2 Malden 21 13 Oxford 21 3 Norwood 20 6 Warren 19 1 East Falmouth 17 1 Ashburnham 16 1 Hopedale 16 1 Bridgewater 15 4 New Bedford 15 15 Hyannis 14 2 North Andover 14 4 West Bridgewater 14 1 Whitinsville 14 1 North Attleborough 13 4 West Boylston 13 1 Fitchburg 12 5 Middleton 11 1 Revere 11 6 Rockland 11 2 Webster 11 2 Chicopee 10 6 Milford 10 3 Acushnet 9 1 East Boston 9 4 Everett 9 4 Hanson 9 1 Lakeville 9 1 Lynn 9 9 Salem 9 4 Wrentham 9 1 Chelsea 8 3 Haverhill 8 5 Lowell 8 9 South Dartmouth 8 3 Worcester 8 15 Brockton 7 7 East Weymouth 7 4 Ipswich 7 1 Marlborough 7 3 North Adams 7 1 West Newton 7 1 Amesbury 6 1 Attleborough 6 3 Dorchester 6 6 Fairhaven 6 1 Lawrence 6 5 Methuen 6 3 Quincy 6 6 Westwood 6 1 Beverly 5 2 Bourne 5 1 Holden 5 1 Jamaica Plain 5 2 Peabody 5 3 Pembroke 5 1 Roxbury 5 3 Westborough 5 1 Acton 4 1 Burlington 4 1 East Wareham 4 1 Gardner 4 1 Leominster 4 2 Middleborough 4 1 Sandwich 4 1 Waltham 4 3 Winchester 4 1 Brookline 3 2 Medford 3 2 Milton 3 1 Randolph 3 1 Roslindale 3 1 Saugus 3 1 Taunton 3 2 Watertown 3 1 West Roxbury 3 1 Braintree 2 1 Brighton 2 1 Dorchester Center 2 2 Mattapan 2 1 Somerville 2 2 Woburn 2 1 Cambridge 1 2 Weymouth 1 1 (not given) 0 58 Boston 0 3 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 Dukes 97 4 Bristol 64 53 Plymouth 53 23 Barnstable 41 8 Essex 35 39 Worcester 35 40 Middlesex 32 76 Norfolk 30 26 Suffolk 16 33 Hampden 8 6 Berkshire 6 1 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/.