Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Citation
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Parent Document
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts (state)
- Effective Date
- 2007-05-17
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6588591/taylor-v-burke/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (31)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
- Taylor v. Burke, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 77 (2007)
Full Text
762 charsAfter trial, a judge in the Housing Court concluded, “on disputed facts and conflicting testimony,” that the tenant had not shown any violation of G. L. c. 186, § 15B.2 The judge found that, “[ajlthough the tenant’s . . . deposit. . . was physically made at a branch office of the Citizens Bank located in New Hampshire, the Citizens Bank was and is a bank doing business and with branch offices in Massachusetts.” Finding no violation of G. L. c. 186, § 15B, with regard to the deposit, the judge went on to consider the landlord’s counterclaim, found that she had proved waste damages beyond normal wear and tear in the sum of $3,303.80, deducted the $1,700 security deposit from that amount, and entered judgment against the tenant in the amount of $1,603.80.