Clifford V. Miller, Inc. v. Rent Control Board of Cambridge
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the CourtKass, J.
Rent control has as its objectives preventing, within limits of economic fairness, inflationary increases in rent and discouraging depletion of the rental housing stock in a community. See Steinbergh v. Rent Control Bd. of Cambridge, 406 Mass. 147, 149 (1989); Valentine v. Rent Control Bd. of Cambridge, 29 Mass. App. Ct. 60, 62 (1990). It is difficult to see how either purpose is served in this case, which has to do with whether the tenants may keep a dog.
*92The rent control board of Cambridge (the “board”) denied to Clifford V. Miller, Inc. (“Landlord”),2 a certificate of eviction directed…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Commonwealth v. TarrantMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- Rubel v. Hayden, Harding & Buchanan, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1983
- Andrews v. Jordan Marsh Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
- Williams v. SederMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
- Kanavos v. Hancock Bank & Trust Co.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1982
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Noble v. MurphyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1993
- University of Lowell Research Foundation v. Classic Elite Yarns, Inc.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1998
- Realty v. McManusMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2006
- Shumway v. PlazaMassachusetts Superior Court · 2002