Rental Property Management Services v. Hatcher
97 N.E.3d 319
Mass.2018Background
- In 2016 Fred Basile, a property manager operating as Rental Property Management Services, filed a Housing Court summary process complaint to evict tenant Loretta Hatcher though he was not the owner or lessor.
- Basile signed the court form as the plaintiff and printed his name where the form asked for "Plaintiff or Attorney;" the actual owners (Andrew Arvanitis and Kathleen Stevens‑Arvanitis, trustee) were not named.
- Hatcher answered, asserted lack of standing and unauthorized practice of law defenses, and counterclaimed under G. L. c. 93A for unfair or deceptive practices.
- Basile admitted he is neither owner nor attorney, that he had filed dozens of similar eviction actions in his name, and that he had been orally directed by the owner to serve documents.
- The Housing Court judge dismissed future filings by Basile in specified circumstances but denied Hatcher’s partial summary judgment on c. 93A; final judgment on that counterclaim was entered by stipulation and Basile appealed.
- The SJC granted direct review and addressed standing, unauthorized practice of law, remedies (dismissal with/without prejudice), and whether Basile’s conduct alone violated c. 93A.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Basile) | Defendant's Argument (Hatcher) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to bring summary process | Basile proceeded as plaintiff (his business) and claimed agency authority from the owner | Basile is not owner or lessor and thus lacks standing; complaint must be dismissed | A plaintiff must be owner or lessor; if not, court lacks subject‑matter jurisdiction and must dismiss the action (with prejudice when lack of standing is fatal to merits) |
| Unauthorized practice of law (non‑attorney signing/filing) | Basile contended practice had been permitted in Housing Court and by court personnel; denied improper intent | Non‑attorney agent signing/filing a complaint on owner’s behalf constitutes unauthorized practice of law | A non‑attorney may not sign and file a complaint for another; court must take corrective action and may dismiss or conditionally permit cure (dismissal without prejudice if cured) |
| Remedy and dismissal consequences | Court should not sua sponte dismiss where issues not raised; practical considerations counsel leniency | Where plaintiff lacks standing, dismissal is required; where unauthorized practice occurs, court may dismiss or allow cure | Court must dismiss for jurisdictional lack; dismissal is with prejudice when standing defect is also dispositive of merits; for unauthorized practice dismissal is discretionary and usually without prejudice to owner cure |
| G. L. c. 93A counterclaim for unauthorized practice | Basile argued the filing did not amount to an unfair or deceptive act under c. 93A | Hatcher argued unauthorized practice and filing without standing are unfair/deceptive and warrant statutory relief | Filing lacking standing or signed by non‑attorney is not alone a c. 93A violation; but where conduct is deliberate or part of a pattern, court may impose sanctions (attorney’s fees, costs) under its inherent authority |
Key Cases Cited
- Ratner v. Hogan, 251 Mass. 163 (1925) (summary process requires proof of landlord‑tenant relationship)
- Cummings v. Wajda, 325 Mass. 242 (1950) (summary process is purely statutory and limited to statutory instances)
- LAS Collection Mgt. v. Pagan, 447 Mass. 847 (2006) (property agent who is not an attorney may not represent owner; signing and filing suffices as unauthorized practice)
- Varney Enters., Inc. v. WMF, Inc., 402 Mass. 79 (1988) (corporations must be represented by attorneys; employee representation insufficient)
- HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Matt, 464 Mass. 193 (2013) (court has obligation to resolve subject‑matter jurisdiction on its own motion)
- Abate v. Fremont Inv. & Loan, 470 Mass. 821 (2015) (dismissal with prejudice appropriate when standing determination negates merits)
- Wong v. Luu, 472 Mass. 208 (2015) (courts possess inherent authority to impose sanctions to preserve fair administration of justice)
- Millennium Equity Holdings, LLC v. Mahlowitz, 456 Mass. 627 (2010) (harms from groundless claims and abuse of process recognized)
- Opinion of the Justices, 289 Mass. 607 (1935) (judicial department has inherent power to control practice of law)