133 WEST MAIN STREET REALTY, LLC v. ALLEN KIMBALL & Another (2025)

Citation: 133 WEST MAIN STREET REALTY, LLC v. ALLEN KIMBALL & Another (2025)
Parent Document: 133 WEST MAIN STREET REALTY, LLC v. ALLEN KIMBALL & Another (2025)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 2025-02-14
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10333571/133-west-main-street-realty-ll... ↗

Full Text

1,838 chars

In short, where (1) the sole basis for the
violation of c. 93A was the technical violation of the State sanitary
code, (2) the Kimballs agreed to pay for utilities since the inception of the
tenancy, and (3) the judge made an explicit and repeated finding that this violation
did not constitute a breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment, the judge erred
in awarding actual rather than nominal damages. 
Poncz, 34 Mass. App. Ct. at 911-912. 
See Youghal, LLC v. Entwistle, 484 Mass. 1019, 1023 (2020) (no error by
judge in awarding nominal damages and reasonable attorney's fees to tenants for
landlord's violation of State sanitary code where lack of written agreement
concerning payment of utilities did not violate covenant of quiet enjoyment);
Knott v. Laythe, 42 Mass. App. Ct. 908, 910 (1997) ("judge was correct in
awarding statutory damages of $25 and a reasonable attorney's fee" for
requiring tenant to pay electrical charges for heat and hot water without
written agreement, which constituted violation of State sanitary code and
unfair practice under c. 93A).  See
also Tyler v. Michaels Stores, Inc., 464 Mass. 492, 503 (2013) (invasion of
consumer's legal right without more "does not necessarily mean the
consumer has suffered an injury or a loss entitling her to at least nominal
damages and attorney's fees;" rather "a plaintiff bringing an action
for damages under c. 93A, § 9, must allege and ultimately prove that
she has, as a result, suffered a distinct injury or harm that arises from the
claimed unfair or deceptive act itself"). 
Contrast Wolfberg v. Hunter, 385 Mass. 390, 397-398 (1982) (discussing
calculation of actual damages award for landlord's violation of c. 93A in
case involving rodent infestation that created "substantial interference
with the use and enjoyment of the apartment" leased by tenants).

Other Sections in This Document (48)

Full Text