Damages – Chapter 93A – Abuse of process

Listen to this article

Where a jury awarded damages in the amount of $5,801,550 for abuse of process, the damages should be doubled based upon willful violations of G.L.c. 93A.

“This Court presided over a civil trial between plaintiff, 477 Harrison Ave, LLC (‘477 Harrison’), and defendants, Jace Boston, LLC (‘JACE’) and Arthur Leon (‘Leon’). A Suffolk County jury returned a verdict in favor of 477 Harrison and against both defendants on all counts submitted to them including an abuse of process claim. Plaintiff’s G.L.c. 93A, §11, claim was reserved for the Court and not tried. The jury’s verdict included damages for plaintiff in the amount of $5,801,550 to be paid jointly and severally by both defendants. This Court must now determine whether plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that defendants violated G.L.c. 93A and, if so, what damages should be imposed, including the possibility of treble damages and attorney’s fees. …

“Based upon the totality of evidence from trial, I find that defendants engaged in trade or commerce and willfully and knowingly committed unfair trade practices through abuse of process and other means all in violation of G.L.c. 93A. …

“Before I further elaborate on defendants’ conduct and make additional findings, I acknowledge that the jury unanimously rejected Leon’s denials that he had ulterior motives or abused process as described herein when it returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff on the abuse of process count. The record clearly supports this verdict, and I find that these facts also apply to the G.L.c. 93A violation as discussed below. …

“As an initial matter, the preponderance of the evidence supports a finding that defendants interfered with trade and commerce as defined by G.L.c. 93A. …

“… The defendants’ conduct was clearly unfair, improper and motivated by ulterior motives as described at length in the fact section contained herein. … The totality of defendants’ conduct toward plaintiff, when taken in context, was not only unfair, but unethical, unscrupulous and oppressive. …

“There is no question that defendants’ unethical, unscrupulous and unfair trade practices injured plaintiff and caused it to substantially delay and redesign the 477 Harrison development to its financial detriment. The jury found damages for the abuse of process in the amount of $5,801,550 and, after review, I find that amount to be reasonable and appropriate based upon the evidence at trial. As the facts supporting the abuse of process claim also support the G.L.c. 93A claim, I find that amount of damages to be reasonable and adequate pursuant to G.L.c. 93A also. I also find that there is a causal connection between the G.L.c. 93A violations and the amount of damages found by the jury. …

“Pursuant to G.L.c. 93A, § 11, plaintiffs may be awarded multiple damages under if the violation is ‘willful or knowing.’ A defendant’s conduct is a willful and knowing violation of G.L.c. 93A when the evidence demonstrates that the defendants had a subjectively culpable state of mind. …

“The coercive conduct of defendants together with their intentional campaign to abuse process for the improper purposes against plaintiff as described throughout this opinion is more than enough evidence for this Court to conclude that defendants’ unscrupulous, unethical and/or unfair trade practices was willful and knowing. The other non-abuse-of-process conduct as described herein also reveals the extent of defendants’ willfulness and knowledge in committing these G.L.c. 93A violations.

“Based upon these willful violations, I find G.L.c. 93A damages in the amount of $5,801,550. Based upon the defendants’ willful and knowing c. 93A violations, those damages are hereby doubled and plaintiff is awarded $11,603,100 in total. …

“For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ordered that judgment shall enter on the plaintiff’s G.L.c. 93A claim in favor of the plaintiff, and the defendants shall pay jointly and severally $11,603,100.00 in damages plus statutory interest and attorneys’ fees. If plaintiff is seeking attorneys’ fees, filings should comply with the procedures set out in Superior Court Rule 9A.”

477 Harrison Ave, LLC v. Jace Boston, LLC, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 12-002-26) (18 pages) (Budreau, J.) (Suffolk Superior Court) (Civil Action No. 15-0829) (Jan. 13, 2026).

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.