Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Lindquist v. Stella, 111 N.E.3d 304 (2018)

Citation
Lindquist v. Stella, 111 N.E.3d 304 (2018)
Parent Document
Lindquist v. Stella, 111 N.E.3d 304 (2018)
Jurisdiction
Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date
2018-09-10

Full Text

1,201 chars
Here, there is no dispute that Lindquist transferred the responsibility for cross-metered utilities to Stella; the issue is whether she did so without Stella's knowledge and consent. On this point the judge found that Stella learned of the cross-metering "only recently, from the [city's] [b]oard of [h]ealth." This finding is clearly erroneous. Although Stella testified that city inspectors told him that there was cross-metering, he did not testify that that was the first time he learned of it. There is evidence, moreover, suggesting to the contrary. Intake notes from the city show that on March 23, 2016, Stella telephoned to complain about "possible cross-metering," stating that "he ha[d] been paying for common lights" and that the conditions existed for "[one] year."4 Stella acknowledged on cross-examination that he is a master electrician and "know[s] all about electricity." In addition, Lindquist's son, Russell Shepard, testified that, at the start of Stella's tenancy, he and Stella together installed the common area smoke detectors and Stella wired them into his electrical box. Shepard also testified that Stella agreed to pay the common area utilities for a reduced monthly rent.