McKenna v. Begin

17 Citing cases

  1. McKenna v. Begin

    5 Mass. App. Ct. 304 (Mass. App. Ct. 1977)   Cited 48 times
    Adopting rule of damages based on percentage impairment of use

    However, in his application of that formula the judge calculated the damages by subtracting the rent agreed upon, which he took to be the rental value of the premises in their defective condition, from the rent paid for other apartments in the building, which the judge found to be the value of the premises as warranted. We remanded the case (see McKenna v. Begin, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 168) to the Superior Court for a further hearing for the proper computation of the damages based upon the formula established in the Hemingway case, supra, at 203. In our earlier opinion, we held that the rent agreed upon could not be taken by the judge as evidence of the rental value of the premises in a defective condition but as the rental value of the premises as warranted to be habitable. Under the formula applied by the judge, rental of defective premises would be tantamount to a waiver of the landlord's implied obligation to let and maintain the premises in a habitable condition and would amount to a waiver of the statutory provisions for the enforcement of the State Sanitary Code.McKenna, 3 Mass. App. Ct. at 170-171.

  2. S. Bos. Elderly Residences, Inc. v. Moynahan

    91 Mass. App. Ct. 455 (Mass. App. Ct. 2017)   Cited 28 times
    Noting that the measure of damages is "how much the defects reduced the value of the residence"

    It bears noting that a landlord is deemed to have constructive notice of conditions present at the inception of a tenancy without proof of actual notice. McKenna v. Begin, 3 Mass.App.Ct. 168, 173-174, 325 N.E.2d 587 (1975). We are not unsympathetic to Moynahan's arguments.

  3. Goreham v. Martins

    485 Mass. 54 (Mass. 2020)   Cited 11 times
    In Goreham v. Martins, 485 Mass. 54 (2020), the Supreme Judicial Court held that the implied warranty of habitability as it applies to residential leases is limited to “the physical facilities” of the property, see id. at 65, quoting Doe, 417 Mass. at 282; and that the warranty did not cover code violations that do not affect “the habitability of a tenant's ‘dwelling unit’ ” such as, in that case, snow and ice on the driveway, Goreham, supra, quoting Doe, supra at 281.

    Id. at 203, 293 N.E.2d 831. See McKenna v. Begin, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 168, 172, 325 N.E.2d 587 (1975). Although this court in Hemingway explicitly did not consider whether the warranty of habitability would apply to personal injury claims by long-term tenants against landlords, see Hemingway, 363 Mass. at 200 n.13, 293 N.E.2d 831, we reached that issue six years later in Crowell v. McCaffrey, 377 Mass. 443, 444, 451, 386 N.E.2d 1256 (1979), where a tenant was injured when a railing on the third-floor porch gave way.

  4. Tosi v. Adams

    673 N.E.2d 1224 (Mass. 1997)

    See Wolfberg v. Hunter,supra at 397-398. The Appeals Court erred in limiting the tenant's damages by ignoring our Wolfberg opinion and by applying instead a contrary principle earlier stated in McKenna v. Begin, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 168, 173-174 (1975). 2.

  5. Haddad v. Gonzalez

    410 Mass. 855 (Mass. 1991)   Cited 120 times
    Concluding that damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress under c. 93A are recoverable and subject to multiple damages

    Cases discussing the measure of damages for breach of the common law warranty of habitability hold that the tenant's damages are to be measured by the difference between the value of the dwelling as warranted (the agreed rent may be used as some evidence of this value) and the value of the dwelling unit as it exists in its defective condition. See, e.g., Boston Housing Auth. v. Hemingway, 363 Mass. 184, 203 (1973); Darmetko v. Boston Housing Auth., 378 Mass. 758, 761 n. 4 (1979); Wolfberg v. Hunter, supra at 399; McKenna v. Begin, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 168, 170-171 (1975). The Wolfberg case is not to the contrary.

  6. Berman Sons, Inc. v. Jefferson

    379 Mass. 196 (Mass. 1979)   Cited 45 times
    Finding exculpatory clause in lease "of no effect"

    The landlord can have no reasonable grounds to believe that noncompliance will be acceptable. The landlord's knowledge of the defect is also sufficient. McKenna v. Begin, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 168, 172-173 (1975). Crowell v. McCaffrey, 377 Mass. 443, 452 (1979), left open the question whether a landlord without notice or actual knowledge of a Code violation can be liable if "by the exercise of reasonable care, [he] could have discovered whatever violations of the codes . . . existed."

  7. Pugh v. Holmes

    486 Pa. 272 (Pa. 1979)   Cited 155 times
    Holding landlord and tenant's obligations mutually dependent

    " Id. One court which initially adopted a "fair market value" approach in computing the amount of rent to be abated, McKenna v. Begin, 3 Mass. App. 168, 325 N.E.2d 587 (1975) ( McKenna I), rejected that approach following appeal from the trial court on remand, and opted for the "percentage reduction in use" formula, McKenna v. Begin, 362 N.E.2d 548 (Mass.App. 1977) ( McKenna II), in order to fashion a measure of damages "which more closely reflects the actual injury suffered by [the tenant]." 362 N.E.2d 552. Under this approach, the rent is to be abated "by a percentage reflecting the diminution the value of the use and enjoyment of leased premises by reason of the existence of defects which gave rise to the breach of habitability.

  8. Curtis v. Surrette

    49 Mass. App. Ct. 99 (Mass. App. Ct. 2000)   Cited 10 times

    While the judge did not explicitly find that the award of three months' rent was greater than the tenants' actual damages, it is sufficiently clear from his written findings that he took into consideration the factors that were necessary to calculate a proper damage award. See, e.g., McKenna v. Begin, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 168, 171 (1975) (in valuing defective premises, "consideration is to be given to various factors including, but not limited to, the nature, duration and seriousness of defects and whether they may endanger or impair the health, safety or well being of the occupants"). The judge properly took the conduct of both parties into account in determining the damage award.

  9. Poncz v. Loftin

    34 Mass. App. Ct. 909 (Mass. App. Ct. 1993)   Cited 7 times

    See, e.g., Wolfberg v. Hunter, 385 Mass. 390, 399 (1982) (involving severe rodent infestation); Montanez v. Bagg, 24 Mass. App. Ct. 954, 957 (1987) (involving rental of apartment condemned, among other things, for inadequate heating facilities). See also G.L.c. 111, § 127L; G.L.c. 239, § 8A. Compare McKenna v. Begin, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 168, 169-171 (1975). The general rule regarding damages for breach of warranty of habitability and State Sanitary Code violations, however, does not apply in the present case.

  10. Abram v. Litman

    501 N.E.2d 370 (Ill. App. Ct. 1986)   Cited 5 times

    In order to assert a claim for a landlord's breach of an implied warranty of habitability, a tenant must show that he gave notice of the alleged defect to the landlord or that the landlord had knowledge of the alleged defect. ( George Washington University v. Weintraub (D.C. 1983), 458 A.2d 43; Old Town Development Co. v. Langford (Ind. App. 1976), 349 N.E.2d 744, appeal dismissed (1977), 267 Ind. 176, 369 N.E.2d 404; Mease v. Fox (Iowa 1972), 200 N.W.2d 791; McKenna v. Begin (1975), 3 Mass. App. Ct. 168, 325 N.E.2d 587; Detling v. Edelbrock (Mo. 1984), 671 S.W.2d 265 (stating only that notice is required); Henderson v. W.C. Haas Realty Management, Inc. (Mo. App. 1977), 561 S.W.2d 382; Pugh v. Holmes (1979), 486 Pa. 272, 405 A.2d 897 (stating only that notice is required).) Some jurisdictions have stated that a landlord's knowledge may be either actual knowledge or constructive knowledge.