Legal Opinion

Black v. Haar

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided June 16, 1982PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCowdrey, P.J.

The plaintiff-tenant instituted this action pursuant to G.L. c. 93A and Chapter 36 of the Acts of 1976, and in tort, to recover damages for rent charged and collected by the defendant-lessor in excess of the maximum rent ceiling imposed by the Cambridge Rent Control Board for premises leased by the plaintiff.

It may be inferred from the docket that judgment was entered for the plaintiff in the sum of $7,240.00.

The defendant, Charles M. Haar, claims to be aggrieved on this appeal by: (1) the trial court’s disposition of defendant’s request for ruling number 3; and (2) an alleged inconsistency…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Donnelly v. MontagueMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
  2. Keeney v. CiborowskiMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
  3. Gentile v. Rent Control Board of SomervilleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
  4. Nayor v. Rent Board of BrooklineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1956
  5. Meyer v. HookerMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1973

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Brooks v. HautalaMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1984
  2. DiGiambattista v. OrlandellaMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1987

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API