Massachusetts Appeals Court Clarifies Tenants’ Right to Raise Retaliation Defense in Evictions for Cause

A recent decision from the Massachusetts Appeals Court, Campbell v. Abdulla, 2024-P-0043, (appealing 22H77SP005330 in Northeast Housing Court) sheds light on an important area of landlord–tenant law: whether tenants can raise a defense of retaliation when facing eviction for cause, not just for nonpayment of rent.

The tenant lived in her apartment for many years before reporting rodent issues and other housing code violations to her landlord and to the Haverhill Board of Health. The board then issued a notice of violation against the landlord. Approximately one month later, the landlord served the tenant with a “for cause” notice to quit.

At trial, the Housing Court judge acknowledged that the tenants had a “facially viable” retaliation defense under Massachusetts law. However, the judge ruled that retaliation defenses only applied to nonpayment cases or no-fault terminations — not to for-cause evictions. The landlord won possession.

The Appeals Court disagreed with the Housing Court judge. It held that retaliation defenses under G.L. c. 239, § 2A and G.L. c. 186, § 18 are not limited to nonpayment or no-fault cases. Instead, they apply broadly to summary process actions, including “for cause” evictions.

Because the landlord’s notice to quit came just weeks after the tenant’s health code complaint, a legal presumption of retaliation arose (which occurs if a notice to quit is sent within six (6) months of a complaint). That meant the burden shifted to the landlord to prove, with clear and convincing evidence, that the eviction was based on independent reasons and not on retaliation.

Timing is critical: Serving a notice to quit soon after a tenant reports code violations can create legal risks.

Higher burden of proof: Once retaliation is presumed, landlords must demonstrate that they would have proceeded with eviction regardless of the tenant’s protected actions.

Careful documentation is key: Landlords should keep detailed records of tenant lease violations and communications to show legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons for any termination.

The Appeals Court’s decision reaffirms Massachusetts’ strong public policy against retaliatory evictions. Landlords should understand that retaliation defenses extend beyond nonpayment cases, and that courts will closely examine the timing and circumstances surrounding any summary process action.