Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Citation
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004) 2.
- Parent Document
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts (state)
- Effective Date
- 2004-01-07
Other Sections in This Document (29)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
- Abdeljaber v. Gaddoura, 60 Mass. App. Ct. 294 (2004)
Full Text
971 chars2. Discussion. The landlord claims that (1) the trial judge’s use of a housing specialist to report back to him, after the trial had ended and without notice to counsel, is reversible error, and (2) the damages awarded by the court for breach of the implied warranty of habitability and for interference with the tenants’ right to quiet enjoyment are duplicative. We agree that the trial judge’s reliance on the housing specialist’s inspection of the apartment to decide the breach of the implied warranty of habitability claim after trial and without notice to the landlord requires us to vacate the trial judge’s decision on that count. That error further requires a subtraction of a component of the G. L. c. 93A damages award. As our discussion below points out, however, because of our disposition there is no longer the possibility that the damages awarded for interference with quiet enjoyment duplicate recovery for breach of the implied warranty of habitability.