Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Citation
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Parent Document
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts (state)
- Effective Date
- 2005-12-20
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8356005/murray-v-zullo/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (28)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Murray v. Zullo, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 293 (2005)
- Section 5
- Section 5
- Section 5
- Section 5
Full Text
764 charsMurray’s tenancy was uneventful until the spring of 2003. In April 2003, Murray began to pay the electric bill, previously paid by the Zullos; she fell behind in her payments. In May 2003, Murray got a dog, and a disagreement ensued about whether she was allowed to keep a pet (the Lease stating that she was not). On August 21, 2003, Murray’s daughter (previously in the custody of the Department of Social Services) moved into the Apartment. The Lease provided that Murray was to be the sole occupant. The FHA told Murray that her daughter could not live at the Apartment without the Zullos’ written permission, which they refused to give. On September 15, 2003, the FHA wrote the Zullos that Murray’s daughter was occupying the Apartment without its permission.