In a case involving the Massachusetts appeal bond statute in a summary process eviction case, the Supreme Judicial Court recently ruled against a family that had been occupying a foreclosed property for 11 years without making mortgage or rent payments.
First it lost a six-figure state grant. Now, Milton is facing a lawsuit after voters rejected zoning that would have complied with the state MBTA Communities law.
Standing is an essential issue in zoning appeals because only persons “aggrieved” may pursue their complaints about a neighbor’s project through the courts.
According to a recent Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision on legal eviction procedures, Rental Property Management Services v. Hatcher, it is unlawful for a property manager or non-lawyer to prosecute a “summary process” (eviction) action on behalf of a property owner or lessor.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that condominium developers can’t unreasonably restrict the ability of owners to file suits against them. The court rejected a “poison pill” provision developers often use to insulate themselves from liability for construction defects, design flaws and other claims condominium owners might pursue against the developers of their communities.
Imagine that you are a real estate developer navigating the Massachusetts permitting process. You committed time and money to a project that will reward your risk-taking, while addressing community needs.
