6.1 Post-Trial Submissions
Where a judge has discretion to decide whether to require post-trial submissions, such as proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law or a proposed judgment, the judge should consider the hardships and challenges that self-represented litigants may face in preparing such submissions.
When post-trial submissions are required, the judge should explain that these documents must comport with evidence admitted at trial. The judge should also inform the parties how and when to submit them.
Commentary
This Guideline is consistent with provisions in the Code of Judicial Conduct permitting judges to exercise their discretion to make reasonable accommodations for self-represented litigants, so long as the accommodations do not give them an unfair advantage or create an appearance of judicial partiality. See S.J.C. Rule 3:09, Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 2, Rule 2.6 comment 1A (2016).
Note that in the District Court and the Boston Municipal Court, in most cases judges need not render specific findings of fact and conclusions of law after jury-waived trials unless at least one party submits proposed findings and conclusions. See Mass. R. Civ. P. 52 (c), as appearing in 450 Mass. 1404 (2008). By agreement, the parties may also waive written findings of fact by the judge in certain proceedings in Superior Court and Land Court. See Superior Court Rule 20 (2) (h) and 20 (8); Land Court Rule 14 (a) (approval of the judge is required in Land Court).
6.2 Issuing the Decision
Judges may exercise their discretion in deciding whether to announce and explain their decisions from the bench with the parties present, or to take the matter under advisement. In deciding which course to take, judges should be mindful of any exigent circumstances.
If there is no immediate need to enter an order, and the judge wishes to take the matter under advisement, the judge should inform the parties that the judge would like to consider their evidence and arguments. If possible, the judge should give the parties a timeframe within which the decision will be issued. The judge should also inform them that the decision will be sent to the mailing address and/or e-mail address that the court has on file for them. If any party has a language access issue, the judge should inform the litigant that it is important to get the decision translated when it arrives.
The judge should make clear that until the decision is issued, any existing temporary orders remain in effect, and the parties must continue to comply with them. If the decision being issued is a temporary order, the judge should explain that there will be further proceedings for which the parties must prepare.
Commentary
This Guideline is consistent with the provisions in the Code of Judicial Conduct that permit judges to make reasonable accommodations, such as explaining the basis for a ruling, in order to help self-represented litigants understand the proceedings and applicable procedural requirements. See S.J.C. Rule 3:09, Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 2, Rule 2.6 comment 1A (2016).
When one or more of the parties present before the court is of limited English proficiency, and there is an interpreter available in person or virtually to provide contemporaneous interpretation, the judge should consider this factor in deciding whether to rule from the bench. Consideration should always be given to safety, security, and courtroom management in deciding when and how to issue a decision.
6.3 Content of the Decision
Decisions should be issued in plain language, make the outcome of the proceeding clear, and provide an understandable explanation for the rationale behind the decision.
Commentary
To make decisions more intelligible, judges should consider the following recommended best practices:
- clearly explain the basis for the court’s rulings and the legal concepts supporting the result;
- avoid legal jargon, abbreviations, acronyms, or shorthand; and
- include information about any further hearings, referrals, or other obligations.
See Cynthia Gray, Reaching Out or Overreaching: Judicial Ethics and Self-Represented Litigants, American Judicature Society (2005), 20-21. See also. S.J.C. Rule 3:09, Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 2, Rule 2.6 comment 1A (2016). For more guidance on the use of plain language, see the resources listed in the commentary to Guideline 2.2.
6.4 Appeals and Other Post-Judgment Matters
Judges should be familiar with available resources for self-represented litigants relating to appeals and other post-judgment matters. Upon inquiry, or when otherwise deemed appropriate, judges should direct self-represented litigants to those resources.
Commentary
Judges may make referrals as appropriate to resources available to assist litigants. See S.J.C. Rule 3:09, Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 2, Rule 2.6 comment 1A (2016). Numerous resources exist to assist litigants in complying with or enforcing the decision, taking an appeal, and pursuing other post-judgment matters such as motions for a new trial and motions to stay. See, e.g., Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries Handbook: Representing Yourself in a Civil Case (2018), which provides explanations for self-represented litigants about enforcement (execution, payment hearings, supplementary process, contempt, and summary process), appeals of court decisions, and the impact of an appeal on enforcement.
Self-represented litigants also may obtain in-person and remote assistance with regard to appeals and other post-judgment actions from the Trial Court’s Court Service Centers. In addition, detailed resources are available online from Trial Court websites, the Appeals Court website, the Supreme Judicial Court website, and websites sponsored by legal aid organizations, such as masslegalhelp.org.