Section 15B
- Citation
- Section 15B
- Parent Document
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts (state)
- Effective Date
- 1986-03-28
Other Sections in This Document (60)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Castenholz v. Caira, 490 N.E.2d 494 (1986)
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
- Section 15B
Full Text
301 charsPossibly the draftsman simply intended, for convenience sake, to group in subsection (6) all violations which would result in the landlord’s losing the right to hold the deposit. More likely, there was a reason to retain the last sentence of subsection (3) (a): The forfeiture under subsection (3) (a)