Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Citation
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Parent Document
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts (state)
- Effective Date
- 2009-10-15
Other Sections in This Document (34)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Taylor v. Beaudry, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2009)
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
Full Text
1,296 charsNo appellate court has expressly construed the phrase “balance thereof to which the tenant is entitled.” Several constructions are possible. One is that the “balance” to be trebled is the difference between the amount the landlord actually returned to the tenant before the judgment or rightfully retained and the amount the landlord should have returned. See M.J. Realty Trust II vs. Dinnocenzo, 2005 Mass. App. Div. 35, 36, 38, S.C., 67 Mass. App. Ct. 1107 (2006). Another is that the balance to be trebled is the difference between the amount returned within thirty days and the total that should have been returned. Yet a third is that the balance calculus comes into play only when the landlord has the right to withhold some part of the security deposit, but is mistaken as to how much and timely returns the rest. In that case, the balance to be trebled would be the difference between the amount properly withheld and the amount actually withheld. If, however, the landlord has no right to retain any part of the deposit, then the amount to be trebled under this approach would be the entire amount of the deposit, and the amount actually *418returned would be deducted from the trebled amount. See Carter vs. Seto, 2005 Mass. App. Div. 62, 63-65, 67, S.C., 66 Mass. App. Ct. 1114 (2006).