Most v. Fitzgerald

632 N.E.2d 837, 417 Mass. 1001, 1994 Mass. LEXIS 227
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMay 5, 1994
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 632 N.E.2d 837 (Most v. Fitzgerald) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Most v. Fitzgerald, 632 N.E.2d 837, 417 Mass. 1001, 1994 Mass. LEXIS 227 (Mass. 1994).

Opinion

The sole issue in this appeal, which we transferred here on our own motion, is the correctness of the dismissal of the small claims appeal to a jury-of-six session where the defendant landlord has filed a counterclaim in the original action. It was error to dismiss the appeal.

The plaintiff (tenant) had been renting premises which the landlord purchased. The landlord sought to terminate the tenancy by serving a notice to terminate on the tenant and later informed the tenant that the premises were to be renovated. The tenant vacated the premises and sought compensation for unused heating oil on the premises and a return of the security deposit. When the landlord refused to give the tenant any funds, the tenant filed a small claims action. The landlord filed an answer and counterclaim. Following a finding for the tenant and a judgment for the tenant on the defendant landlord’s counterclaim, the landlord appealed to a jury-of-six session. This appeal was dismissed because, according to the notice of judgment, “Defendant filed counterclaim — thereby becoming a Plaintiff and only a defendant is entitled to an appeal.” The statute provides that a plaintiff in a small claims action waives the right of appeal to a jury session. G. L. c. 218, § 23 (1992 ed.).

There is no language in the rules or statutes which converts a defendant who files a counterclaim into a plaintiff. The short answer is that a defendant in a small claims case has a right of appeal by statute and does not lose such right by filing a counterclaim. See G. L. c. 218, § 23. We agree with the Appeals Court decision in the case of Bischof v. Kern, 33 Mass. App. Ct. 45, 46-47 (1992).

Judgment reversed.

William Pudlo for the defendant.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Onyeagoro v. E.T. Engineering Enterprises, Inc.
905 N.E.2d 1105 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
632 N.E.2d 837, 417 Mass. 1001, 1994 Mass. LEXIS 227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/most-v-fitzgerald-mass-1994.