Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Citation
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Parent Document
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts (state)
- Effective Date
- 2003-09-30
Other Sections in This Document (22)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
- Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
Full Text
1,104 charsQureshi sent the new lease to her lawyer, who responded on September 8, 1999, with a letter to Fiske with seventeen proposed alterations, some of which were mechanical (e.g., that the description of the leased premises should state that they consist of 937 square feet) and some of which were material. In the latter category were a right by tenant to assign or sublet, permission so to do not to be unreasonably withheld by landlord; a provision that when tenant vacated the premises, tenant would not be responsible for “the removal of any plumbing, electrical, conduit/lines”; a requirement that landlord was to have the water “tested no less than once per year for purity”; a warranty from landlord that the water serving the premises at the time of the new lease had “been tested and approved by the appropriate authorities”; a set aside of parking places for tenant’s “clients”; a right of first refusal to lease suite 150 should it become available; a clause tying future rent increases to the consumer price index; and a limitation that any rent increase was not to exceed four percent per year.3