August 26, 2020

In Massachusetts, Superior Court judge won’t block state’s eviction moratorium; plaintiffs plan to appeal

BY Steph Solismasslive.com

A Suffolk Superior Court judge denied a request to preliminary block Massachusetts officials from enforcing the eviction moratorium signed into law earlier this year in response to the economic crisis sparked by the COVID-19 pandemic.

In a 34-page decision, Judge Paul Wilson said the emergency law pausing evictions statewide neither interferes with core judicial powers nor blocks access to the courts as landlords can take other legal action against non-paying tenants, including filing a breach of contract lawsuit for monetary damages.

Wilson called access to stable housing a “crucial component” of containing COVID-19 in Massachusetts. He argued the floodgates would open for evictions, making renters who have lost work and can’t afford to make rent during the pandemic move and risk contracting the virus. That economic and health risk to the public and the state, he added, outweighs the financial hit landlords take in the short term during the eviction moratorium.

“By temporarily keeping people where they currently live, it ensures efficacy of social distancing guidelines, prevents homelessness, and limits housing overcrowding, thereby limiting the spread of the disease,” Wilson wrote. “The Law also promotes economic health not only for the potentially displaced tenants but also for all residents of Massachusetts, as displacement and increased reliance on the shelter system and emergency services would increase costs to the Commonwealth.”

Jordana Greenman, one of the attorneys representing the landlords, said she believed Wilson’s opinion was too deferential to the state.

“We disagree with the decision,” she said. “We intend to appeal it.”

An appeal would mean the case would go to the state appellate court or potentially the SJC, Greenman said.

The state lawsuit garnered attention and input from several civil rights organizations and community groups, including the City Life/Vida Urbana, the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute, Chelsea Collaborative, Greater Boston Legal Services, Community Legal Aid, Springfield No One Leaves and Lynn United for Change.

“We believe today’s thoughtful Superior Court order appropriately recognizes that the Moratorium law plays a vital role in Massachusetts’ ongoing and comprehensive effort to defeat the spread of COVID-19 and should remain in place as long as the emergency persists,” the coalition of organizations said in a statement to MassLive. “This is especially critical in the communities hardest hit by the disease – the communities of color and low-income neighborhoods our client groups represent.”

The eviction moratorium became law in April after housing advocates argued renters who couldn’t afford rent during the coronavirus pandemic, and the state’s closure of non-essential businesses would end up displaced in the middle of a public health crisis.

In July, Gov. Charlie Baker extended the moratorium to Oct. 17, citing the continued spread of COVID-19 in Massachusetts.

The U.S. Census Bureau estimated last month that more than 300,000 Massachusetts renters had “slight” or “no confidence” that they would be able to pay rent in August.

Housing court administrators estimated they could be flooded with 20,000 eviction cases if the moratorium expired in August as originally scheduled.

Landlords who oppose the eviction moratorium, however, argue that some tenants have taken advantage of the emergency law as an excuse to avoid paying rent. Mitchell Matorin, one of the landlords named in the lawsuit, said tenants in one of his Worcester units repeatedly paid their $1,200 a month rental payment late and after January stopped paying it altogether. Matorin had a 14-day notice to quit for the non-paying tenants, but efforts to evict them were put on pause because of the moratorium.

In his decision, Wilson argued that landlords and their tenants have other recourses to obtain money, including seeking financial assistance from the state through one of its COVID-19 funds. He said Matorin and other plaintiffs’ inability to evict non-paying tenants from one unit of a three-family house “does not deny all economically viable use of their property.”

Lawyers for the landlords, who each reported at least one case of a tenant failing to pay rent before the pandemic, asked the Supreme Judicial Court in June to overturn the moratorium. The SJC sent the case to the Superior Court.

Greenman and Richard Vetstein filed a separate suit in Boston federal court challenging the moratorium and removed the federal claims of First Amendment and contract rights violations from the state case.

U.S. District Court Judge Mark Wolf rejected the state’s motion to issue a stay on the case given the state lawsuit.

Wolf heard arguments about a motion to issue a preliminary injunction, but he has yet to decide despite previously suggesting a ruling would come Wednesday.

Instead, he called for a joint status report by 4 p.m. Monday and, among other things, asked the state to explain how they would proceed if he granted a preliminary injunction. A hearing on the preliminary injunction, and motions to dismiss multiple counts are set to resume at 1:30 p.m. Tuesday.