Massachusetts Court Rejects Commercial Self-Help Evictions

An appellate court vacated a previous judgment, ruling that landlords cannot bypass legal processes for evictions.

Updated on Oct. 15, 2026 in Apartments

Bold flat-color editorial illustration of a monolithic granite archway, symbolizing the authority of formal legal procedure. — The Massachusetts Appeals Court ruled that commercial landlords must follow formal legal eviction procedures, invalidating the use of unauthorized self-help measures. AI Illustration. Upload story photo >

Live Poll

Should commercial landlords be prohibited from using self-help lockouts against tenants who default on their leases?

An appellate court ruled that commercial property landlords in Massachusetts cannot use self-help evictions to remove tenants. The decision vacates a previous trial court judgment and mandates further proceedings to address claims of illegal lockouts.

Why it matters

This ruling clarifies that statutory protections against illegal lockouts extend to commercial rental properties in the state. By invalidating self-help measures, the court ensures that property disputes must be resolved through established legal channels.

The court confirmed that G.L.c. 184, §18 applies to commercial properties and prohibits self-help evictions. The case involves a contested 200% penalty provision for use and occupancy payments.

The players

Hingham District Court

This is the trial-level court where the original judgment in the property dispute was entered.

The details

The appellate court determined the lower court failed to address whether damages should be offset by the landlord's use of self-help. Consequently, the case was returned to the Hingham District Court to resolve the illegal lockout claim before recalculating attorney's fees.

1977: The court decided Gidwani v. Wasserman.
1986: The court decided Lawless-Mawhinney Motors, Inc. v. Mawhinney.
2023: The court decided Dacey v. Burgess.
July 3, 2026: The original judgment was entered in Hingham District Court.
October 15, 2026: The appellate court issued the current decision.

Culture Shift

This ruling reflects a broader shift toward formalizing commercial landlord-tenant relations by rejecting informal eviction practices. It aligns with historical precedents like Gidwani v. Wasserman, reinforcing the requirement for legal oversight in property disputes.

Commercial tenants in Massachusetts now have clearer legal standing to contest lockouts and may seek offsets for illegal self-help actions. Landlords must prioritize standard eviction procedures to avoid potential litigation regarding these prohibited tactics.

The takeaway

Property owners should strictly adhere to formal legal eviction processes to avoid significant financial and legal liabilities. Commercial tenants should remain aware of their statutory rights against self-help lockouts to ensure fair treatment during lease disputes.