State's highest court tells man who keeps filing motions it's had quite enough

The Supreme Judicial Court today put Kaveh L. Afrasiabi on notice: The next time he files an appeal with them before a trial he's involved in is over, he better have some pretty darn good reasons, or they will impose sanctions - like not even letting him file more appeals.

Afrasiabi, a one-time Harvard postdoc who has been embroiled in various legal actions since the 1990s, had asked the state's highest court to remove both the judge and the assistant district attorney in a criminal-harassment case in Cambridge District Court - and to reverse the judge's rulings in several evidence-related motions he had filed.

The SJC noted these requests were the fourth and fifth such requests Afrasiabi, acting as his own attorney, has filed in cases dating to 2000.

The court ruled that in both the most recent requests, Afrasiabi failed to answer a required question: "Why review of the trial court rulings at issue here cannot adequately be obtained on appeal from a final adverse judgment," rather than interrupting his case by filing what are essentially appeals before the case has concluded.

The court continued that Afrasiabi should be "well aware" of this requirement, since the issue came up in his earlier appeals as well.

Given Afrasiabi's repeated petitions seeking relief in circumstances where he plainly has an adequate alternative remedy, as well as his repeated failure to comply with rule 2:21, we now place Afrasiabi on notice that any subsequent attempt to seek relief from this court pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3, that suffers from like deficiencies may result in action by the court, including restriction of future filings.