Maguire v. Haddad

Rule of Law:

A landlord cannot unilaterally increase the rent of a tenant at will by serving a notice offering the alternative of quitting the premises or paying higher rent; if the tenant refuses to pay the increase, no new tenancy is created, and the original tenancy remains in effect.

Facts:

• The defendant, Haddad, occupied an apartment owned by the plaintiffs as a tenant at will with a monthly rent of $60 payable in advance.
• The plaintiffs delivered a notice to the defendant stating he must vacate the premises unless he was willing to pay an increased monthly rental of $85.
• The defendant remained in the apartment after the notice period but continued to send checks for only the original $60 rent.
• The plaintiffs accepted these checks but issued receipts indicating a balance due based on the requested $85 rate.
• The defendant never expressly agreed to the increase and steadfastly refused to pay the extra amount.
• Consequently, the plaintiffs served the defendant with a notice to vacate specifically alleging non-payment of rent as the cause for eviction.

Procedural Posture:

• The plaintiffs sued the defendant for summary process (eviction) in the Municipal Court of the West Roxbury District.
• The defendant appealed the Municipal Court's decision to the Superior Court.
• The Superior Court judge heard the case without a jury.
• The Superior Court judge denied the defendant's requests for rulings and found in favor of the plaintiffs for possession.
• The defendant filed a bill of exceptions to the Supreme Judicial Court regarding the judge's rulings.