Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

McGrath v. Mishara, 434 N.E.2d 1215 (1982)

Citation
McGrath v. Mishara, 434 N.E.2d 1215 (1982)
Parent Document
McGrath v. Mishara, 434 N.E.2d 1215 (1982)
Jurisdiction
Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date
1982-05-03

Other Sections in This Document (74)

Full Text

845 chars
The tenants’ suggested construction of c. 93A runs counter to the underlying goal of an “equitable relationship” between consumers and those in business. In the instant case, for example, the tenants’ multiple damage theory would render the landlord liable for well over $10,000 under three different statutes for its wrongful retention of $135 from the tenants’ security deposit. We decline to attribute to the Legislature the intent to permit such a recovery. Multiple damage provisions such as those contained in all three of the statutes involved here reflect the Legislature’s displeasure with the proscribed conduct and its desire to deter such conduct and encourage vindicative lawsuits. Hampshire Vil *86 lage Assocs. v. District Court of Hampshire, 381 Mass. 148, 150-151, cert. denied sub nom. Ruhlander v. District Court of Hampshire,