Mass. Trial. Ct. R. 9
Commentary
2009 Amendments. Paragraph (d) now authorizes transfer to the appropriate court when the defendant moves from the original court's geographical jurisdiction, whether before or after judgment.
Paragraph (e) requires for the first time in Massachusetts that the plaintiff file an acknowledgment of satisfaction with the court once a judgment is paid in full. Paragraph (f) provides a remedy to the defendant where plaintiff fails to file an acknowledgment. These additional provisions are necessitated by the difficulty that defendants increasingly experience in proving that a judgment that appears in a credit report was satisfied, sometimes years before.
2001 Amendments. Paragraph (a) is amended to eliminate the directive to the clerk to "make such inquiry into the matter [of non-payment], if any, as he deems useful." Since a clerk may later preside over enforcement proceedings as a magistrate, such informal contacts are best avoided since they might well involve ex parte discussions that would be inconsistent with a magistrate's responsibilities under S.J.C. Rule 3:12, Canon 3.
Paragraph (b) reflects the recommendation of the Trial Court Committee on Small Claims Practices and Procedures that magistrates be authorized to preside over proceedings to enforce small claims judgments, but not to enter adjudications of civil contempt or to make orders of incarceration. When such steps appear necessary, the matter is to be transferred to a judge "immediately," which assumes no need for rescheduling or further notice if a judge is then available.
While it is expected that most proceedings to enforce small claims judgments will be conducted by magistrates, paragraph (b) preserves the authority of judges to preside over such enforcement hearings ab initio.
New paragraph (c) makes it a matter of routine for a defendant who claims to be unable to pay the judgment in full to complete a sworn financial statement. The specific assignment of the burden of proof in paragraph (c) restates current case law. Roy v. Leventhal, 5 Mass. App. Ct. 792 (1977). See also G.L. c. 215, § 34 (in Probate Court contempt proceedings, "the defendant shall have the burden of proving his or her inability to comply with the pre-existing order or judgment of which the complaint alleges violation"). The defendant's financial statement shall be treated as confidential information in terms similar to those of Rule 401(d) of the Supplemental Rules of the Probate Court. See Rule 7(g) and the Commentary thereto.