Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Citation
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Parent Document
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts (state)
- Effective Date
- 1987-04-02
Other Sections in This Document (40)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
- Jinwala v. Bizzaro, 505 N.E.2d 904 (1987)
Full Text
1,285 charsThe plaintiff (landlord) brought a summary process action in a District Court seeking to evict the defendant (tenant) from residential premises in Belmont. See G. L. c. 239. The tenant filed a counterclaim alleging violation by the landlord of the security deposit law. See G. L. c. 186, § 15B. It is undisputed that the landlord did violate the security deposit law by (1) failing to put the security deposit of $600 in a separate, interest-bearing account in a bank (G. L. c. 186, § 15B[3][a]), (2) failing to pay interest on the security deposit (§ 15B[3][b]), and (3) failing to give the tenant a separate written statement of the condition of the rented premises (§ 15B[2][c]). Under the provisions of § 15B(7), the failure of the landlord to put the security deposit in a separate bank account required the award of treble damages plus interest, court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees. After the filing of the tenant’s counterclaim, the landlord moved to amend the summary process complaint to add a claim for damages to the premises; the motion was denied. Judgment was thereafter entered for the landlord for possession and for the tenant on her counterclaim in the amount of $1,800.00 as damages and $200.00 as attorney’s fees. An appeal by the landlord was not perfected.