Mellor v. Berman, 390 Mass. 275 (1983)

Citation: Mellor v. Berman, 390 Mass. 275 (1983)
Parent Document: Mellor v. Berman, 390 Mass. 275 (1983)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 1983-10-03
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6575926/mellor-v-berman/ ↗

Full Text

1,516 chars

The pertinent language, found in G. L. c. 186, § 15B (7), states that if the lessor violates certain provisions,7 including a provision requiring a lessor to return a security deposit or the balance to which the tenant is entitled, plus interest, within thirty days after termination of the tenancy, “the tenant shall be awarded damages in an amount equal to three times the amount of such security deposit or balance thereof to which the tenant is entitled plus interest at the rate of five per cent from the date when suph payment became due, together with court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees.” We have already indicated our view that the statute, as written, is unambiguous.8 “The statute is unambiguous. ‘The language employed is neither peculiar nor technical, but is comprised rather of familiar words commonly combined to express, as they do here, a simple thought. Thus we construe the statute according to the common and approved use of this language.’ ” Jason v. Jacobson, 387 Mass. 21, 24 (1982), quoting New England Medical Center Hosp., Inc. v. Commissioner of Revenue, 381 Mass. 748, 750 (1980). See Commonwealth v. Graham, 388 Mass. 115, 120 (1983); Registrar of Motor Vehicles v. Board of Appeal on Motor *280Vehicle Liab. Policies & Bonds, 382 Mass. 580, 585 (1981). The plain language of G. L. c. 186, § 15B (7), indicates that the application of the multiple damages provision is not conditional on a finding of bad faith on the part of a lessor committing one of the specified violations.9

Other Sections in This Document (38)

Full Text