Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Citation
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Parent Document
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts (state)
- Effective Date
- 2005-10-13
Other Sections in This Document (21)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
- Jablonski v. Casey, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 744 (2005)
Full Text
993 charsWe also conclude, after reviewing the evidence, that Casey was not entitled to prevail on her counterclaim for retaliatory eviction. See G. L. c. 186, § 18; G. L. c. 239, § 2A. Casey argues that her eviction was in retaliation for signing a petition in November, 2000, complaining of conditions in several of the apartments at Presidential Acres. The trial judge, however, did not find that this petition was ever sent to York. Even if York had received the petition in November, 2000, the eviction would not be presumed to have been retaliatory because the eviction process did not begin until August, 2001, more than six months later. See G. L. c. 186, § 18 (notice by landlord of termination of tenancy within six months after tenant complains of conditians in apartment creates “rebuttable presumption that such notice ... is a reprisal against the tenant”). Furthermore, when, as here, the eviction is based on nonpayment of rent, a finding of retaliation will not normally lie. See ibid.