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

655 chars
The other two findings are clearly erroneous, however. Lindquist met her burden of showing that the rent increase could not have been retaliatory because Stella testified that Lindquist notified him of it in December of 2015, and there was no evidence that Lindquist even knew about Stella's call to the city until January of 2016. Regarding the purported change in parking, this finding was premised on evidence that Shepard started parking on the public street in a spot regularly used by Stella. As discussed below, however, Shepard's action cannot be imputed to Lindquist and thus does not support Stella's claim that Lindquist retaliated against him.