Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Al-Ziab v. Mourgis, 424 Mass. 847 (1997)

Citation
Al-Ziab v. Mourgis, 424 Mass. 847 (1997)
Parent Document
Al-Ziab v. Mourgis, 424 Mass. 847 (1997)
Jurisdiction
Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date
1997-05-08

Full Text

772 chars
The landlords argue that it was error for the trial judge to rule, as she did, that a violation of the lead paint statute, is necessarily a violation of G. L. c. 186, § 14. The judge’s decision in effect, they say, impermissibly holds them strictly liable for the payment of the plaintiffs’ attorney’s fees, an award that is not available under the lead paint statute itself. While we have interpreted the provisions of the quiet enjoyment statute on several occasions, see, e.g., Cruz Mgt. Co. v. Thomas, 417 Mass. 782, 788-790 (1994), and cases cited, we have not previously considered whether strict liability imposed under the lead paint statute (or any other statute *850regulating the conduct of landlords) without more constitutes a violation of G. L. c. 186, § 14.