Yezhov filed a lawsuit against Shcherbin and the city administration for the inclusion of the living quarters left after his mother’s death in her hereditary mass.
In a lawsuit, Yezhov indicated that his mother occupied a room in a communal apartment under a social contract. The tenant of the other room is Shcherbin. Shortly before her death, her mother submitted an application for the privatization of her room to the city administration, but the privatization was not finalized due to her death.
The judge left the statement of claim without a motion, indicated that it could not be finally accepted, because: firstly, documents confirming the will of Yegov’s mother to privatize the room, as well as the fact that Yezhov didn’t have a son, were not attached to him; secondly, the application was paid by the Yezhov state fee in the amount of 1/10 of the minimum wage, while it was subject to a fee based on the market value of the room.
Are there grounds for leaving the claim without motion?
What evidence in support of his claim should Yezhov be attached to the statement of claim?

After payment you will be available a link to the solution of this problem in the file of MS Word. It should be noted that the problem solutions put up for sale were successfully handed over in the period 2004-2019 and could be outdated. However, the general algorithm will always remain true.