A recent decision by a justice of the Massachusetts Superior Court demonstrates that it may be prudent for owners of rental property and insurers of rental property to become more involved in the eviction process of tenants. In our capacity as counsel to various rental property owners and their insurers, we have seen a number of cases where tenants and former tenants have brought claims against their landlords for personal injuries. In some cases we have learned that the same parties had also been involved in a prior eviction action and as part of the resolution to that action had entered into either an agreement for judgment, settlement or othere disposition in that proceeding. Depending on the wording of any kind of disposition, agreement or settlement, a plaintiff's claims for injuries sustained on the property while a tenant may be precluded by the principle of res judicata. This principle encompasses doctrines that require a judgment in a prior action to have a binding effect on a subsequent action between the same parties. One form of res judicata is known as issue preclusion and it applies to instances where both parties were also parties to an earlier action where the same issue was addressed. The second form is known as claim preclusion and it applies to instances where a valid, final judgment conclusive on the parties bars further litigation on all matters that were or should have been adjudicated in the prior action. The latter form is more broadly applied as it looks to claims that could have been brought in the prior action. In this recent Superior Court decision, former tenants, who were now plaintiffs in a negligence claim against their former landlord, sought to amend their complaint against the landlord for injuries suffered to their daughter while they were all tenants of the landlord. The landlord and tenants had been parties to an eviction proceeding in the Housing Court prior to and during the pendency of the Superior Court action. The landlord had filed a summary process complaint against the tenants and the tenants had answered the complaint. As is customary under Chapter 239 of the Massachusetts General Laws, the tenants filed counterclaims against the landlord in an effort to defend against the eviction and included a claim for breach of the implied warranty of habitability. In their counterclaims, the tenants referenced the injury to their daughter. The parties later entered into an agreement for judgment and the matter was dismissed. When the plaintiffs' attorney attempted to amend the pending negligence complaint and add a claim for breach of implied warranty, the landlord opposed the motion on the grounds that the principle of res judicata (both issue and claim preclusion) barred the new claim. The landlord argued that not only were they the same parties and that this claim had been presented in a prior court, but that the claim was or should have been adjudicated in the Housing Court matter. As a practical matter, landlords should pay close attention to the language of any agreement for judgment or settlement with their tenants because the principle of res judicata can have the effect of barring any subsequent claims by tenants against their landlord. Where possible, landlords may want the terms of the agreement to bar any such claims that the tenants may have against them. Conversely, if landlords acknowledge that a valid claim exists, they may want to specifically address the claim and have it defined in the agreement. Where a personal injury has been alleged, the landlord should have already placed its insurance provider on notice. As such, the insurance provider may engage an attorney to assist in this process. This could help avoid additional and costly litigation for the landlord and its insurance company. These principles could also apply to the commercial setting, especially where a tenant fails to pay, is evicted through the court system, and then later attempts to assert a breach of contract or other claim against the landlord.
Contact Info:
Jeffrey J. Trapani, Esq. (413) 732-2301
Send Email
Related Stories:
Attorney Jeffrey Trapani - Appeals Court Issues Opinion Reinforcing Public Employer Immunity
July 24, 2010 | MINDING YOUR BUSINESS Articles and Case Digests That Impact Your Business and Life
Attorney Trapani Named to Legislative Steering Committee for the ACCGS
March 09, 2010 | Robinson Donovan P.C.
Superior Court Allows Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement filed by Attorneys Pelletier and Trapani
March 02, 2010 | Robinson Donovan P.C.
Attorneys Rapinchuk and Trapani Obtain Summary Judgment in Favor of Employer in Claim for Handicap Discrimination and Retaliation Action.
February 02, 2010 | Robinson Donovan, P.C.
Appeals Court Affirms Summary Judgment Obtained for Property Owner by Attorneys McCormick and Trapani
January 05, 2010 | Robinson Donovan P.C.
Attorney Jeffrey Trapani - Advice to Residential Landlords in a Global Recession
January 05, 2010 | Robinson Donovan P.C.
Robinson Donovan Attorneys Named To Massachusetts Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers in America Lists for 2009
November 04, 2009 | Robinson Donovan, P.C
Attorneys Jeffrey McCormick and Jeffrey Trapani Successfully Defend Hartford Law Firm Sued in Bankruptcy Court
May 19, 2009 | Robinson Donovan P.C.
Robinson Donovan Lawyers Named To Super, Best Lists for 2008
November 12, 2008 | Robinson Donovan, P.C.
|
