Source: http://massachusettslandlords.com/2017-south-boston-elderly-residences-inc-vs-gerald-moynahan/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 07:07:47+00:00

Document:
Home » LAW » 2017 SOUTH BOSTON ELDERLY RESIDENCES, INC. vs. GERALD MOYNAHAN.
the Housing Court Department on February 4, 2013.
W. Paul Needham for the landlord.
bad at one point that mushrooms were growing in the carpeting.
part, and remand for additional proceedings.
13 has long suffered from moisture and related mold problems.
trial, moisture issues in unit 13 predated Moynahan’s tenancy.
and he downplayed the impact of the moisture issues on him.
some of the specific dangers presented, such as a fire hazard.
wayside.” Moynahan continued to pay his rent.
because of water coming up from below. . . .
inaccessible windows constituted a sanitary code violation.
retaliation by landlords, see G. L. c. 186, § 18, and G. L.
interfered with his quiet enjoyment of the premises, see G. L.
necessary to confirm whether the problem existed.
and a twenty percent abatement for January and February of 2012.
These damages equaled one month’s rent, $788.
With respect to Moynahan’s claim brought pursuant to G. L.
its attention (with any delays the fault of Moynahan).
interest and costs of suit. See G. L. c. 239, § 8A, fifth par.
law de novo.” U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. Schumacher, 467 Mass.
numerous claims of error, which we address in turn.
sanitary code. See Simon v. Solomon, 385 Mass. 91, 96 (1982).
counterclaims, we do not address them. See Mass.R.A.P.
16(a)(4), as amended, 367 Mass. 921 (1975).
time he remains in possession.” Boston Hous. Authy. v.
abating part of his rent for the period prior to August, 2011.
problem. We therefore treat these issues as distinct problems.
Mass. App. Ct. 168, 173-174 (1975).
it existed throughout his tenancy.
consequence to our resolution of this case.
material breach of warranty of habitability upon notification).
material breach of the warranty of habitability has occurred.
mistake has been committed”), quoting from United States v.
United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948).
not capable of precise measurement”).
that others did not note or recall a fume problem in unit 13.
the implied warranty of merchantability).
of law subject to de novo appellate review.
found, any appellate case addressing this issue directly.
of the issues touched on a tenant’s special sensitivities.
in had there been no breach”).
Mechanical Corp. v. Union Mach. Co. of Lynn, 21 Mass. App. Ct.
(1914); doCanto v. Ametek, Inc., 367 Mass. 776, 783-784 (1975).
sensibility” (however that is measured).
Mass. 582, 588 (1977) (citation omitted).
they were inspecting the apartment in 2012.
ISD. See G. L. c. 186, § 18.
together with reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. G. L.
itself. See Clark v. Leisure Woods Estates, Inc., 89 Mass. App.
quit was served in retaliation for his ventilation complaint.
a separate basis for an award of attorney’s fees and costs.
period to cure the underlying noncompliance. See 940 Code Mass.
93A applies to “unfair or deceptive” conduct, Klairmont v.
breach of] warranty” claim. Berman, 379 Mass. at 200.
damages. Wolfberg v. Hunter, 385 Mass. 390, 398-401 (1982).
related mold issues in March, 2010. See 940 Code Mass. Regs.
there were severe clutter problems in unit 13 at that time.
exacerbate rather than excuse the landlord’s inaction.
dismissing the c. 93A claim.
that the landlord interfered with his quiet enjoyment, see G. L.
Commonwealth v. Va Meng Joe, 425 Mass. 99, 102 (1997).
home may constitute an interference with quiet enjoyment. Cf.
United Co. v. Meehan, 47 Mass. App. Ct. 315, 320 (1999).
Moynahan’s property and that of other tenants if ignored. Cf.
access to address the problem for several days.
narrower grounds than those relied upon by the judge.
opposition to the amount requested.

References: § 18
 § 8
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 § 18
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v.