PHOEBE FLEMMING v. GREYSTAR MANAGEMENT SERVICES, L.P., 177 N.E.3d 1244 (2021)

Citation: PHOEBE FLEMMING v. GREYSTAR MANAGEMENT SERVICES, L.P., 177 N.E.3d 1244 (2021) 4.
Parent Document: PHOEBE FLEMMING v. GREYSTAR MANAGEMENT SERVICES, L.P., 177 N.E.3d 1244 (2021)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 2021-10-28
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10271968/phoebe-flemming-v-greystar-man... ↗

Full Text

701 chars

4. General Laws c. 93A and class certification. Because Flemming's c. 93A claim was derivative of her claim under the security deposit statute, she cannot establish a c. 93A violation pertaining to the animal rent, reletting and buyout fees, and attorney's fees. See, e.g., Park Drive Towing, Inc. v. Revere, 442 Mass. 80, 85-86 (2004); Macoviak v. Chase Home Mtge. Corp., 40 Mass. App. Ct. 755, 760 (1996). Her suggestion at oral argument that Greystar violated c. 93A independent of any violation of the security deposit statute was not fairly raised in the complaint or summary judgment papers, and so we need not address it. See Carey v. New England Organ Bank, 446 Mass. 270, 285 (2006). [Note 7]

Other Sections in This Document (43)

Full Text