Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

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)

Full Text

526 chars
The evils which the security deposit law sought to address are suggested by the statute itself. “A security deposit shall continue to be the property of the tenant making such deposit, shall not be commingled with the assets of the lessor, and shall not be subject to the claims of any creditor of the lessor or of the lessor’s successor in interest, including a foreclosing mortgagee or trustee in bankruptcy . . . .” G. L. c. 186, § 15B(l)(e). The law allows for the receipt under strict conditions (§§ 15B[2][b], [c] & [d],