BRANDA PEEBLES & Another v. JRK PROPERTY HOLDINGS, INC., & others. (2025)

Citation: BRANDA PEEBLES & Another v. JRK PROPERTY HOLDINGS, INC., & others. (2025)
Parent Document: BRANDA PEEBLES & Another v. JRK PROPERTY HOLDINGS, INC., & others. (2025)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 2025-08-01
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10646213/branda-peebles-another-v-jrk-p... ↗

Full Text

1,146 chars

This interpretation of the statute accords with the only published Massachusetts appellate decision brought to our attention that squarely addresses wear and tear in the context of a residential lease, albeit without discussing G. L. c. 186, § 15B (4) (iii).  In Goes v. Feldman, 8 Mass. App. Ct. 84, 86 (1979), the Appeals Court affirmed a judgment in favor of the tenant under G. L. c. 93A where the lessor had sought to deduct from the security deposit $125 because "the tenants had stained the carpeting beyond repair," and "there were holes in the living room wall which required spackling and repainting."  A Housing Court judge "found that the carpeting and walls in the apartment . . . were substantially in the same condition at the end of their tenancy as they were at the beginning, fair wear and tear excepted."  Id.  The Appeals Court held that the record supported this conclusion, id. at 91-92, evidently agreeing that, in the circumstances presented, stains requiring replacement of the carpet and holes requiring spackling amounted to reasonable wear and tear to be expected from the tenants' use of the apartment as a residence.

Other Sections in This Document (49)

Full Text