Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

CUMMINGS PROPERTIES, LLC v. DARRYL C. HINES., 201 N.E.3d 295 (2022)

Citation
CUMMINGS PROPERTIES, LLC v. DARRYL C. HINES., 201 N.E.3d 295 (2022)
Parent Document
CUMMINGS PROPERTIES, LLC v. DARRYL C. HINES., 201 N.E.3d 295 (2022)
Jurisdiction
Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date
2022-12-05

Other Sections in This Document (38)

Full Text

1,015 chars
Sometime in the spring of 2017, about one year into the original five-year lease term, Cummings signed a four-year lease with a new tenant and relet the premises. [Note 2] Nonetheless, in January 2020, Cummings initiated this action against Hines as guarantor of the original lease, seeking to recover all of the rent due under the remainder of the five-year term. [Note 3] After the jury-waived trial, the judge issued a thoughtful written decision, in which he first concluded that Hines was "sufficiently sophisticated" to be held to the terms of the lease, including the rent acceleration clause. Then, construing the acceleration clause as "requir[ing] damages equivalent to the amount owed during the full term of the contract," the judge concluded that it was an enforceable liquidated damages provision because the stipulated sum was a reasonable estimate of Cummings's anticipated damages. Judgment then entered for Cummings in the amount of $82,143.01, comprising damages, prejudgment interest, and costs.