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

1,187 chars

Because the question whether damage is reasonable wear and tear thus depends on all the relevant circumstances, we cannot respond to the Federal court's first certified question by setting the bright-line rule requested by the plaintiffs, that all security deposit deductions for damage requiring cleaning or painting are deductions for reasonable wear and tear in violation of G. L. c. 186, § 15B (4).  Rather, we respond that a tenant's reasonable use of a property as a residence is expected to result in gradual deterioration that ultimately may require painting, carpet cleaning or repair, or other refurbishment at the end of the lease, and security deposit deductions for such reasonable wear and tear violate the statute.  Whether damage to a particular property is in fact "reasonable wear and tear" within the meaning of G. L. c. 186, § 15B (4) (iii), depends on all the circumstances, including but not limited to the nature and cause of the damage, the deterioration to be expected as a result of the tenant's or tenants' reasonable use of the property under the terms of the lease, the condition of the property at the start of the lease, and the length of the occupancy.[7]

Other Sections in This Document (49)

Full Text