SOME OF THE REASONS WHY GOVERNMENT OF AMERICA MUST OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN SHUTDOWN YEARS AGO

SOME OF THE REASONS WHY GOVERNMENT OF AMERICA MUST OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN SHUTDOWN YEARS AGO

Waste! waste!!  waste !!! of money and time to punish others that have contra or different point of view, color, ethnic/religion/racial background different from America and Americans.

Government of America refused to grant work permit to a family (Ofume) of 8 people  and majority is employable and also bidding for the President of Nigeria past and 2015. This family is also Permanent Resident of Canada and inside and outside US, the government of America have spent over $5billion since 1989 to force the head of this family, Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume to abandon his bid for the President of Nigeria with money and life endangerment but Dr. Ofume and the people of Nigeria and his national and international NGOs oppose.

To leave US to other countries, government of America has been wasting money to buy ambassadors and consuls. For example, on August 28, 2013 the Ofumes applied for travel documents under emergency application which takes about 7 days to issue but the government of america continues to waste money to lobby the embassies and consulates because the oil/gas companies think that Dr. Ofume President of Nigeria will make them loss about $80million/day which they are getting in Dr. Ofume's impoverished native region of the NIGER DELTA REGION OF NIGERIA. Major part of this money is from the oil/gas theft  inside and outside Nigeria and this wasteful use of money will stop soon as they start to spend from their official profits or income.

Major money is wasted because of politics here and there, inside and outside the judicial and senate systems; race and color; etc. Race and color is a good role players because Obamacare has future of income or profit and should not be overruled.

The present government has done everything to pay part of the $17trillion foreign and domestic debts and propels hope on to grantors or lenders that there is hope in the future to clear the debts but money goes from hand and to mouth without investment or focus. Whites are in control of the majority of the money of America and unable to use the commonwealth to make America the richest country in the world. Waste, waste, waste OR  war/conflict war/conflict, war/conflict  here and there no mercy for money, birth to present time.

Waste!!! the lawsuits posted below entered the two highest courts (Commonwealth of Massachusetts Court of Appeals and Supreme Judicial Court)in Mass under Emergency and to save no fault disputed property and the unpreferred presidential candidate of Nigeria, Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume and family who have suffered 12 non fault evictions since 2009 because of this bid, filed over 5 motions within 24 hours to stay the proceedings but for no reason, denied  simultaneously to meet purpose of which money was issued to these courts which is to achieve the purpose of the 12th homelessness.

But the question is what brought these appeals  to the highest court in Mass? In issue what brought these appeals to this level is whether a family of 8 people with $580.00 cash benefit and $650.00 food stamp under federal and state poverty level. No normal judge and court would deny the appeal. Under the high speed to complete the rounds to render the Ofumes 12th homelessness, Judges of boston housing court, court of appeals and supreme judicial court dismissed the 5 motions without reading the motions.

_____________________________________________________________________

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

                                        

               SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT

                     CIVIL ACTION SJC. NO. SJC 2013-0393

                    APPEALS COURT:     CIVIL NO.   2013-J-0367

                    HOUSIJNG COURT : CIVIL ACTION DOCKET  NOS. 13H84SP002057; 13H84CV000400; 13H84CV000264;

_____________________________________________

PHILLIP OFUME

               Petitioner/Defendant (Pro se )

                        v.

THE CLERK/MAGISTRATE OF THE HOUSING  & MASS APPEAL COURTS  

                        and

CYNTHIA  HECTOR , ALAN HECTOR, ET ALS

                 Respondents

____________________________________________________

APPELLANT, PHILLIP OFUME’S  AMENDED  VERIFIED EMERGENCY MOTION  (EX-PARTE – ACTION)  FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE SINGLE JUDGE TO JURY OF JUDGES  -  STAY OF EVICTION OR POSSESSION  OF THE  PREMISES, 41 GALLIVAN BOULEVARD 1ST FLOOR DORCHESTER, MA O2124 PURSUANT TO  M.R.A.P. 6,  5TH  & 14TH Amendments to the Constitution  and Bill of Rights of the United States (Due Process Rights and Procedural Due Process);   Magna Charta( 1215 - provided that no freeman should be imprisoned, disseised, outlawed, exiled, or destroyed, unless by the "law of the land),

_________________________________________________

Here comes Appellant/Defendant, Dr. Phillip Ofume moves this Court to enter emergency Order purpose of staying the intended action of the Sheriff (Mass Constable Service) today to seize and take possession of the disputed premises with  rent amortization in June 2014 and also the Hon Single  Judge did not consider that the landlord will not suffer any irreparable harm and loss and that Appellant and his six children and wife will suffer irreparable harms, loss and damages which no law can secure or restate because the harms include but unlimited to homelessness because the housing agencies are influenced by the rich landlords and appellant’s political opponents and eventual  loss of children to the DCF; loss of education because this new school year, suffer psychological torture in the 12th political and unjust or no fault eviction and homelessness, etc. Because of this harm  Appellant requests Jury of Judges of this Court to Reconsider his Motion because of the following further new reasons:

1.   Below the only part to enable this case move to court appeals is consideration of Appellant’s AFFIDAVIT OF INDIGENCY or Bond.

2.  The Hon. Single Judge granted Appellant’s AFFIDAVIT OF INDIGENCY which is the only the issue in this case pending below to enable Appellant’s appeal proceed to review or trial before the Court of Appeals.

3.  The action  of The Hon. Single Judge for granting Appellant’s AFFIDAVIT OF INDIGENCY automatically grants Appellant’s pending  Motion for Partial Appellate  Review because the only issue or case is AFFIDAVIT OF INDIGENCY.

4. The Hon. Single Judge did not consider that the landlord will not suffer any irreparable harm and loss and that Appellant and his six children and wife will suffer irreparable harms, loss and damages which no law came secure or restate because the harms include but unlimited to homelessness because the housing agencies are influenced by the rich landlords and loss of children to the DCF; loss of education because this new school, suffer psychological torture , etc

5.  The Hon. Single Judge  did not consider that there are score of CMR sanitation violations which have arisen out from several CMR Violations reports.

6. The Hon. Single Judge  did not consider that bond or rent is not necessary because the advanced rents and payment enlarge to June 2014 and appellant and his family and church have paid the utility bills in advance.

7. The Hon. Single Judge did not consider that irrespective of the advanced rent and utility paid to the landlords and utility companies they disconnected appellant’s hot water, heat , and failed to fix several defects in the apartment for over one year. Appellant and his family have suffered greatly there is no court in the US to question them because of the unconstitutional power of the nigeria’s foreign and domestic oil/gas companies.

OTHER  IEGAL ISSUE RAISED HERE AND BELOW AND UNCONSIDERED BY THE SINGLE JUDGE

8.   Appeal Bond Hearing was scheduled for September 13, 2013 and on this date early as Appellant was walking his kid to the school several vehicles containing Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) officers arrested Appellant and members of his family and detained them. Appellant and his wife was released late in the evening and their elder child was not released. Information revealed that the Respondents called these operatives to block Appellant from attending his Appeal Bond Review hearing.

9.   Because of paragraph 1 above, filed the following,

“A PPELLANT/DEFENDANT’S  VERIFIED EMERGENCY MOTION  FOR  PARTIAL FURTHER APPELLATE REVIEW AND STAY OF ISSUE OF EXECUTION AND/OR PARTIAL RECONSIDERATION OF THE ORDER/JUDGMENT (09/19/2013 OF THE PRESIDING HONOURABLE JUSTICE VUONO – EXHIBIT A) FROM THE ABSENTIA APPEAL BOND HEARING (09/13/2013)  PURSUANT TO M.S.C.R. 9D; M.G. L. Chapter 261,   Sec, 27A ; 5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Due Process Rights and Procedural Due Process);   Magna Charta( 1215 - provided that no freeman should be imprisoned, disseised, outlawed, exiled, or destroyed, unless by the "law of the land); M.R.A.P. 27.1; M.R.A.P. 23; etc to The Presiding Honourable Justice Vuono”

and restated request for stay.

10.   Appellant has served the Motion stated in paragraph 2 on all parties and no opposition has been filed by all the parties in this case and the “back house” the landlords gave  the Sheriff  money to issue execution without respect  for  the appeal bond hearing before this Court. The same thing they in the Suffolk County Superior Court when the Appellees deceived the Court clerks that no services were made on therm and without informing The Honourable Justice Elizabeth Fahey the clerks dismissed Appellant’s  Complaint and  and Judge Fahey had already mark up Motion in the Complaint for hearing and before the hearing date the appellees have received an illegal dismissal letter from the influenced clerks. On the Judge Fahey hearing date only Appellant was present. Judge Fahey that Appellant file Appellant’s and sheriff’s proof of services and upon receiving these proof of service Judge Fahey vacated the dismissal of the Clerks.

11.  In the Court of Appeals  the Presiding Hon. Justice thinks that granting double stay  with another Appellant’s Affidavit of Indigency  to file the Motion on October 2, 2013 will impede the awaiting hearing and determination of Appellant’s MOTION  FOR  PARTIAL FURTHER APPELLATE REVIEW which is about Appellant’s AFFIDAVIT OF INDIGENCY and because of this conflict Judge Grasso denied Appellant’s Motion for further Stay (EXHIBIT D).

ACTION OF  MASSACHUSETTS CONSTABLE SERVICE IS ILLEGAL AND MUST BE STAYED

12.    In addition to the stay granted by Judge Muirhead  in her  judgement date August 6, 2013 (EXHIBIT C) and other motions such as Motion for Partial Further Appellante Review  now properly  pending in Court of Appeals and notice of appeal filed and  also pending  in Court of Appeal stay of possession and execution are active and inforce and the action of MASSACHUSETTS CONSTABLE SERVICE is illegal and unconstitutional and must be stayed.

13.   On October 1, 2013 at about 1.45 pm a Deputy Sheriff who refused to disclose his  name served on Appellant EXHIBITS  A & B which execution/eviction documents containing intention to evict Appellant and his family on October 4, 2013 at 11. a.m.

14.      The Appellees, Landlords have Appellant’s advanced rents upto June 2014 and they have refused to issue refund of these  rents.

15.       Judge  Muirhead allowed the ONLY Lease between the landlord and Dr. Ofume but Judge Muirhead did not do  simple arithmetic to find out the number of $400.00 per month that will be on the following payment  in total amount of $10,698.09 /$400.00 :

                                          RELIEF SOUGHT

For the good reason stated above, Appellant request this Count to allow his Motion and issue a written Order to  be served on the Sheriff to avoid confrontation on October 3, 2o13 at 11.00 am.

                                           VERIFICATION

 I, Dr. Phillip Ofume, respectfully verified, signed and submitted the foregoing documents under the pains and penalties of perjury this  3RD    day of October 2013,

__________________

 Phillip C. Ofume, Ph.D. 

 41 Gallivan Boulevard 1st Floor

Dorchester, MA 02124    

P. O. Box 2416

Lynn, MA 01903

Tel. 617-606-1753  & 857-258-3987   

limptintinc@gmail.com,ofume.phillip@gmail.com,

globalaids_hivcureinteracion@yahoo.co.uk

             CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I,  Dr. Phillip Ofume certify that a true copy of the document (Notice of Appeal) was served up on all parties by  U.S. PVI Postal Service first class mail or hand delivery on October 3, 2013 at: 

              

Rev. & Mrs. Cynthia & Allan Hector c/o Attorney O’Toole

41/43 Gallivan Boulevard #2 (2nd floor)

Dorchester, MA  02124

Executive Director

National Grid (Legal Dept.)

220 Victory Road

Dorchester, MA 02122

(617) 822-5400

Acting Executive Director – Mr. Henry F. Vitale

Boston Water Commission-BWSC (Legal Dept.)

 980 Harrison Ave.

Boston, MA 02119

Executive Director

NSTAR (Legal Dept)

One NSTAR Way

Westwood, MA 020

Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department

Civil Process Division

132 Portland Street

Boston, MA 02114

Phone: (617) 704-6999

Fax: (617) 704-6998

__________________

Dr.  Phillip Ofume

_______________________________________________________________________

                         COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

                                    APPEALS COURT

 _____________________________________________________________________

     CONSOLIDATED AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL

              CIVIL APPEAL  NO.2013-J-0367

  LOWER COURT  CIVIL ACTION DOCKET  NOS. 13H84SP002057; 13H84CV000400; 13H84CV000264;

_____________________________________________________________________________

            Phillip Ofume  v. Cynthia Hector and Allan Hector et als

_______________________________________________________________________________

 APPELLANT/DEFENDANT’S  VERIFIED EMERGENCY MOTION  FOR  PARTIAL FURTHER APPELLATE REVIEW AND STAY OF ISSUE OF EXECUTION AND/OR PARTIAL RECONSIDERATION OF THE ORDER/JUDGMENT (09/19/2013 OF THE PRESIDING HONOURABLE JUSTICE VUONO – EXHIBIT A) FROM THE ABSENTIA APPEAL BOND HEARING (09/13/2013)  PURSUANT TO M.S.C.R. 9D; M.G. L. Chapter 261,   Sec, 27A ; 5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Due Process Rights and Procedural Due Process);   Magna Charta( 1215 - provided that no freeman should be imprisoned, disseised, outlawed, exiled, or destroyed, unless by the "law of the land); M.R.A.P. 27.1; M.R.A.P. 23; etc to The Presiding Honourable Justice Vuono

_______________________________________________________________________________

HERE COMES, Appellant, Dr. Phillip  Ofume pro se, indigent  or Forma Pauperis,  hereby moves respectfully request this Honourable Court FOR  PARTIAL FURTHER APPELLATE REVIEW AND/OR PARTIAL RECONSIDERATION OF THE ORDER/JUDGMENT (09/19/2013) FROM THE ABSENTIA APPEAL BOND HEARING (09/13/2013)  particularly in the manner of further Appellate Review  pursuant to M.R.A.P. 27.1  to enable Appellant to establish his and family’s  indigent statuses pursuant to M.S.C.R. 9D; M.G. L. Chapter 261,   Sec, 27A ; 5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Due Process Rights and Procedural Due Process);   Magna Charta( 1215 - provided that no freeman should be imprisoned, disseised, outlawed, exiled, or destroyed, unless by the "law of the land); M.R.A.P. 27.1; M.R.A.P. 23; etc  because of the following further reasons:

PART

A.                                    ISSUE & ANALYSIS

1.     Whether indigency status review in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and United States in general is not taken under federal and  state poverty levels

ANALYSIS :

Starting from June 29, 2013 following the Intervention by different governments inside and outside the system of the United Nations, two members of Appellant’s family were granted food stamps and cash benefits by the Mass Department of Transitional Assistance (DTA) all of which falls below federal and  state poverty levels but it helped to properly define the Indigent Status of the Appellant and his family which states clearly that  “Indigent”, (a) a person who receives public assistance under aid to families with dependent children. Food Stamp: $625.00  and Cash Benefit $580.00 (EXHIBITS B & C ) and the M.G. L. Chapter 261, Sec, 27A  clarifies determination of indigency as follows:

Section 27A. As used in sections twenty-seven A to twenty-seven G, inclusive, the following words shall have the following meanings:

“Indigent”, (a) a person who receives public assistance under aid to families with dependent children,

 Appellant and his family “receive public assistance under aid to families” and they are  “with dependent children,” and the present size of their household is six children and two biological parents and married since June 1, 1986 under the native law and custom of Agbor, Delta State of Nigeria. Even if nothing is further written and submitted to this Court this paragraph of Part A is enable to grant Appellant and his family the status of “Indigent”.

At this point the Courts and Judges below have no iota of justification to deny Appellant’s Affidavit of Indigency and the CURRENT Appellant’s Affidavit of Indigency is herewith incorporated with this Motion and marked EXHIBIT  G

2.    Whether under 5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Due Process Rights and Procedural Due Process) absence of the Appellant in Court on September 13, 2013 did not impede proof of his indigency because this affidavit of indigency has been granted by all the courts in the United States where Appellant has filed lawsuits and severally granted by Judge Marylou Muirhead when Appellant filed the Original Complaint with the Court below or Boston Housing Court in the Matter Ofume v. Hectors et als Docket No. 13H84CV000264 dated on April 4, 2013 and several other Petitioner/Motion including Ofume v. Hectors et als

ANALYSIS:

In addition to several telephone calls to the Clerk/Magistrate of this Honourable Court to inform them about his absence during the hearing on September 13, 2013, also below is detail proof as to reason Appellant did not attend the hearing on September 13, 2013. Appellant and his family suspect that the Appellees/Plaintiffs are  the author of the anonymous telephone call to the FBI, ICE and other operatives which drafted several SUV vehicles containing several security operatives to raid Appellant’s and family’s apartment on September 13, 2013 and arrest him and some members of his family to prevent Appellant from attending the hearing.  Former tenants of the Plaintiff’s apartment where Appellant and his family reside have confessed that Plaintiffs have used voodoo on them and called police and other operatives on them to generate criminal allegations against them and Plaintiffs have personal keys to their apartment (41 Gallivan Boulevard 1st Floor Dorchester, MA 02124 ) and have opened  their apartment absentia to do harm them. In addition to the September 13, 2013 incident that Appellant suspect was created by the Plaintiffs who called themselves Reverend father/mother and member of FOUNTAIN OF GRACE CHURCH, CANTON MASS or ordained man/woman of God, again and again Plaintiffs have filed secret criminal petitions and affidavits inside and outside courts, police, etc against Appellant and his family and in support see EXHIBITS  D, E & F. all of which Plaintiffs have forged or falsified to remove Appellant and his family from the disputed apartment without refunding the advance rents and utilities bills which they paid up to June 2014 to Plaintiffs. Because they have wasted over $10,800.00 which Appellant, his family and Church paid to Plaintiffs in oversea long vacations without investing the money into profit making ventures, they are in a haste to evict Appellant and his family to rent out the apartment to another tenants to continue the same scam or rental fee fraud.  Former tenants who are in part members of the FOUNTAIN OF GRACE CHURCH, CANTON MASS further confessed that Plaintiffs would not allow them and their visitors to park their vehicles even less than  5 minutes before they call towing people to tow away their vehicles. Majority of the visitors that visited Appellant and his family suffered the same ordeals. For example, since September 13, 2013 the ICE and ISAP operatives who have been visiting Appellant and his family have suffered the harassment and bullying of the Plaintiff and they maybe contacted at 781-272-4601.

B.     GOOD CAUAE REASON APPELLANT DID NOT ATTEND BOND APPEAL HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 13, 2013

3.        Appellant by himself and on behalf his family said,

“On Sept. 13, 2013 our father, Dr. Phillip C. Ofume was walking our little brother to school

when several vehicles containing plain clothe and uniform operatives crossed their pathway and told our father "you are under arrest" and suddenly they placed handcuff on him and went to take our mother and our elder brother Keynes Ofume and drove them to their deportation facility after he informed  them that we are  permanent residents in Canada and that we are leaving the United States soon and  our dad and mom were  released after several hours late in the evening and Keynes was detained  at Suffolk County Correction Center and they said he maybe deported  to Nigeria according to Judge Matthew D’Angelo’s scattered deportation Order.

Swiftly and heartlessly deportation notices were issued to each member of our family and ordered our departure immediately because some one in our community telephoned to say that we have no immigration papers and we have arms and we support dangerous cartels. The head of this operation ask Dr. Ofume “how many guns and tones of drugs do you have in your apartment?”Dr. Ofume answered none and told them that we are very poor people and our church and other good Samaritans pay our rents because we have no work permit and we have refused to abandon our bid for the President of Nigeria to enable the government of America remove these sanctions and embargos on us. Also that we are members of THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRISTOF LATTER-DAY SAINTS and we do not drink, smoke, fight, drink coffee, use dangerous drugs and other hard substances.  SEE EXHIBITS H, J, K,

4.    On September 13, 2013 later evening Dr. & Mrs. Ofume were released by ICE and Appellant telephone this Court and he followed some phone directory and recorded message.  On September 16, 2013 he called the Clerk of this Court and indicated the interest to file this Motion. Appellant and his family received this decision on September 24, 2013 by mail.

C.                      STATEMENT OF FACT

5.    Appellant and his family arrived in the United States on September 29, 2005 following Appellant’s  and his family’s consent of landing issued on President George W. Bush and his Hon. Secretary of States Dr. Condoleezza Rice.

6.     On September 29, 2005 Appellant and his family left Canada  by booking direct or non-stop flight, Halifax International Airport to Washington, DC but at Boston Logan Airport, Appellee/Plaintiff forced the Aircraft  to land and US Immigration Officials  impounded and seized Appellant’s and his family’s  unexpired UN Refugees Travel Documents and Passports, Academic and Professional Qualifications and Awards, Flight Tickets, Birth Certificates, Torture Medical Report, Torture Photographs, Newspapers, torture photographs, Court documents and submissions, etc. The reason for this seizure is to block the family’s further journey to Washington, D.C. where  the persecution and torture stated in this motion wouldn’t have been possible because of the presence of several diplomatic missions and media presence..

7.    This seizure is designed  to frame-up charge [212(a)(7) (A)(i)(I)] against Dr. Ofume and his family who arrived in the US with unexpired documents and pursuant to the UN Convention of July 28, 1951 and US Immigration (Asylum) Law.  The reason for these seizures and ex-communications are to impose sanction and embargo on the Appellant and his family to impede their access to rights to services including work permit to disrupt their campaign for the President of Nigeria and freedom of movement and association.

8. Appellant and his family have been denied services and these denials, persecution and mistreatment created the multiple litigations in several courts in the United States and Canada. All these cases were taken and filed with Affidavit of Indigency.   

9.  Further Appellate Review is very important in this case to enable The Presiding Hon. Justice view and review the physical material exhibits on the long history of Appellant’s approve or granted Affidavit of Indigency and his and family’s new income  since June 29, 2013 through September 2013.     

D.             ARGUMENT AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW

10.   Under the Paper or Document Reduction Act of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and United States based on costs, Appellant will make photo copies of few Affidavit of Indigency granted Appellant within six months in 2013.

11.   Applicants have  been granted several waivers of bond or cash in the matter, Ofume family v. George W. Bush, DHS, et als Docket No. 08 - 1450 - US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to The Supreme Court of the United States Docket No. 08- 8873; Massachusetts Northeast  Housing Court, Lawrence (Docket  No.  *07-CV-00178); Ofume family v. Boston Housing Authority US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Docket No. 08-2475; etc.

12.    EXHIBITS B & C are the only income to the Appellant and his family and the church and others will start paying the rent and utilities starting from June 2014 if the government of America refused to grant Appellant and his family work permit and right to engage in self-employment. Under the income determination of the  M.G. L. Chapter 261, Sec, 27A  an indigent is person like the Appellant and his family “who receive public assistance under aid to families with dependent children” and this the imposed economic status  of the Appellants in the United States since September 29, 2005.

13. This Court will reclaim its honorable status if all who appears before it is granted the rights to be heard and judged accordingly. The Judge in this case has genuinely recognized this just status as stated under 5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Due Process Rights and Procedural Due Process) and Magna Charta( 1215 - provided that no freeman should be imprisoned, disseised, outlawed, exiled, or destroyed, unless by the "law of the land and The Presiding Hon. Justice clearly said, “ I discern no meritorious defenses of which the defendant cant avail himself.” The only remedy to this deprivation is M.R.A.P. 27.1 further Appellate Review.

                 MEMORANDUM OF LAW

M.G. L. Chapter 261, Sec, 27A 

Section 27A. As used in sections twenty-seven A to twenty-seven G, inclusive, the following words shall have the following meanings:

“Indigent”, (a) a person who receives public assistance under aid to families with dependent children, program of emergency aid for elderly and disabled residents or veterans’ benefits programs or who receives assistance under Title XVI of the Social Security Act or the medicaid program, 42 U.S.C.A. 1396, et seq.; (b) a person whose income, after taxes, is 125 per cent or less of the current poverty threshold established annually by the Community Services Administration pursuant to section 625 of the Economic Opportunity Act, as amended; or (c) a person who is unable to pay the fees and costs of the proceeding in which he is involved or is unable to do so without depriving himself or his dependents of the necessities of life, including food, shelter and clothing, but an inmate shall not be adjudged indigent pursuant to section 27C unless the inmate has complied with the procedures set forth in section 29 and the court finds that the inmate is incapable of making payments under the plans set forth in said section 29.

“Fees and costs”, fees and costs shall not include attorneys’ fees.

“Normal fees and costs”, the fees and costs a party normally is required to pay in order to prosecute or defend the particular type of proceeding in which he is involved shall include, but not be limited to, the following: in all civil cases, filing or entry fees, including the surcharges required by section four C of chapter two hundred and sixty-two; fees and related costs for service of process, including publications of a citation when publication is ordered; fees and costs for the issuance or service of a subpoena and witness fees for trial or deposition; jury trial fees; removal fees; costs assessed in a bill of costs; in equity, fees for the issuance of an injunction, restraining order, writ or other process; in the probate and family court department, fees for an amendment of record.

“Extra fees and costs”, the fees and costs, in addition to those a party is normally required to pay in order to prosecute or defend his case, which result when a party employs or responds to a procedure not necessarily required in the particular type of proceeding in which he is involved. They shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the cost of transcribing a deposition, expert assistance and appeal bonds and appeal bond premiums.

“Clerk”, the clerk or an assistant clerk or the register or an assistant register.

“Inmate”, a person committed to, held by or in the custody of the department of correction or a state, county or federal correctional facility or the treatment center under chapter 123A.

Massachusetts Appellate Procedure

Rule 23: Issuance of Rescript: Stay of Rescript

The clerk of the appellate court shall mail to all parties a copy of the rescript and the opinion, if one was written. The rescript of the court shall issue to the lower court twenty-eight days after the date of the rescript unless the time is  or enlarged by order. The timely filing of a petition for rehearing or of an application for further appellate review will stay the rescript until disposition of the petition or application unless otherwise ordered by the appellate court. If the petition or application is denied, the rescript shall issue forthwith unless the appellate court or a single justice orders otherwise. If an application for further appellate review is granted the rescript of the Appeals Court shall not issue to the lower court.

Amended effective February 24, 1975.

M.R.A.P. 27.1

Massachusetts Appellate Procedure

Rule 27.1: Further Appellate Review

[Disclaimer]

(a) Application; When Filed; Grounds. Within twenty days after the date of the rescript of the Appeals Court any party to the appeal may file an application for leave to obtain further appellate review of the case by the full Supreme Judicial Court. Such application shall be founded upon substantial reasons affecting the public interest or the interests of justice. Oral argument in support of an application shall not be permitted except by order of the court.

D.                             CONCLUSION/RELIEF

Based on the foregoing and particularly 5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Due Process Rights and Procedural Due Process) and Magna Charta( 1215 - provided that no freeman should be imprisoned, disseised, outlawed, exiled, or destroyed, unless by the "law of the land) this appeal will be unfair if only the  landlords were heard. Appellant request this Honourable Court and Judge to hear the major prong of his appeal which is review and determination of his Affidavit of Indigency and grant it because Appellant and his family are indigents. 

E.                       VERIFICATION

 I, Appellant, Phillip Ofume, respectfully verified, signed and submitted the foregoing documents under the pains and penalties of perjury this 25th  day of September 2013,

__________________

 Phillip C. Ofume, Ph.D.  

 41 Gallivan Boulevard 1st Floor

Dorchester, MA 02124     

P. O. Box 2416

Lynn, MA 01903

Tel. 617-606-1753  & 857-417-2497   

limptintinc@gmail.com,ofume.phillip@gmail.com,

globalaids_hivcureinteracion@yahoo.co.uk

                                       CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I,  Dr. Phillip Ofume certify that a true copy of the document (opposition) was served up on all parties by  U.S. PVI Postal Service first class mail or hand delivery on September 25, 2013 at:  

               

Rev. & Mrs. Cynthia & Allan Hector

41/43 Gallivan Boulevard #2 (2nd floor)

Dorchester, MA  02124

Executive Director

National Grid (Legal Dept.)

220 Victory Road

Dorchester, MA 02122

(617) 822-5400

Acting Executive Director – Mr. Henry F. Vitale

Boston Water Commission-BWSC (Legal Dept.)

 980 Harrison Ave.

Boston, MA 02119

Executive Director

NSTAR (Legal Dept)

One NSTAR Way

Westwood, MA 020

__________________

Phillip Ofume