Massachusetts Eviction Sealing Law Explained (193 H.4977 Section 52)

Eviction sealing is in effect May 2025. Here’s the full text of the law, in plain English.

Eviction Sealing Full Text Explained

Below we explain the eviction sealing law enacted August 2024. The law modifies Chapter 93 and Chapter 239.

SECTION 28.

Subsection (a) of section 52 of chapter 93 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2022 Official Edition, is hereby amended by adding the following clause:-

(7) court records sealed pursuant to section 16 of chapter 239.

Sealed records are protected in all forms of consumer reporting.

Chapter 93 governs consumer reports. These can no longer contain sealed court records.

SECTION 52.

Chapter 239 of the General Laws is hereby amended by adding the following section:-

Chapter 239 is the law on eviction. A new section has been added.

Section 16. (a) As used in this section, the following words shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly requires otherwise:-

Definitions

The law redefines some terms already defined elsewhere, creating confusion with credit reporting law.

“Consumer report”, a written, oral or other communication of any information by a consumer reporting agency bearing on a person’s credit worthiness, credit standing or credit capacity that is used or expected to be used or collected, in whole or in part, for the purpose of serving as a factor in establishing the person’s eligibility for rental housing or other purposes authorized under section 51 of chapter 93.

This law attempts to redefine a consumer report, which is already defined in Chapter 93, Section 50. In doing so, this eliminates needed procedure in that consumer protection law. For instance, this narrower definition prohibits housing providers from talking about a rental application with a case worker assisting the renter in housing search.

Bad for good renters, renters with housing barriers and bad renters: Housing providers cannot freely talk with other housing providers, with renter case workers or with anyone about a renter experience (good, bad or indifferent) for fear it may relate to a sealed case.

“Consumer reporting agency”, an individual, partnership, corporation, trust, estate, cooperative, association, government or governmental subdivision or agency or other entity that, for monetary fees, dues or on a cooperative nonprofit basis, regularly engages, in whole or in part, in the practice of assembling or evaluating consumer credit information or other information on consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports to third parties.

Eviction sealing applies to all background check companies, to MassLandlords and to any individual who ever comments on, in any way, their experience with any renter. These vague and seemingly all-encompassing definitions severely limit speech.

For example, if one landlord is talking to another at dinner about a bad experience they had, and this dinner occurs “regularly,” that could be considered prohibited speech.

Bad for housing providers: This chills speech by all housing providers for fear it may pertain to a sealed record.

“Court”, the trial court of the commonwealth established pursuant to section 1 of chapter 2695 211B and any departments or offices established within the trial court.

The law has redefined “court.”

Bad for the Land Court and banks: This broad definition includes the Land Court, which may refer to an eviction as part of a foreclosure, creating potential for redacted and partially sealed foreclosure documents.

“Court record”, any paper or electronic records or data in any communicable form compiled by, on file with or in the care custody or control of, the court that concern a person and relate to the nature or disposition of an eviction action or a lessor action.

Court records are defined here as every document in court possession related to eviction or if a renter sues a landlord (rare).

“Eviction action”, a summary process action under this chapter to recover possession of residential premises.

Under this law, all evictions are sealed.

“Lessor action”, any civil action brought against the owner, manager or lessor of residential premises by the tenant or occupant of such premises relating to or arising out of such property, rental, tenancy or occupancy for breach of warranty, breach of any material provision of the rental agreement or violation of any other law.

If a renter sues a landlord, that is also to be kept secret. This protects bad landlords.

Bad for good renters: If a landlord is sued for not doing their job, no other renter may ever see that.

“No-fault eviction”, an eviction action in which the notice to quit, notice of termination or complaint does not include an allegation of nonpayment of rent or violation of any material term of the tenancy by the tenant or occupant;

This law expands the definition of “no-fault eviction” to include any for-cause eviction where the breach is not “material,” whatever that means.

Bad for the courts: Court staff will have to read the docket to understand what type of eviction the case is; the stated reason in the notice is not enough.

provided, however, that a “no-fault eviction” shall include an action brought after termination of a tenancy for economic, business or other reasons not constituting a violation of the terms of the tenancy.

A tenancy is terminated when a notice to quit is sent. We think this is meant to cover the serving and filing of a summary process summons and complaint. It could be meant to recast all future eviction attempts as the same as the first, however many years prior.

Bad for housing providers: It looks like we get only one chance to state our reasons for eviction.

(b) Any person having a court record of a no-fault eviction on file in a court may petition the court to seal the court record at any time after the conclusion of the action, including exhaustion of all rights of appeal.

No-fault evictions are immediately sealed.

A renter can seal a no-fault eviction, preventing it from being seen or discussed by any landlord ever again, when the case is done and over.

No-fault evictions are used to clear a building for sale or renovation only if the landlord is dumb or the renter refuses a relocation assistance payment. The courts are just too slow for a no-fault eviction to make sense on any normal development or brokerage timeline.

Why are there any no-fault evictions? Because not all landlords can meet evidentiary standards.

Bad for good renters in no-smoking buildings: In the case Gwendolyn Property Management v. Goodwin, Johnson (2021, 21H85SP001694), a for-cause case with witnesses was brought against smokers in a no-smoking building. But the judge threw it out as hearsay. A second eviction later got the renters out. No-fault cases are used when a landlord fails to meet evidentiary standards or when renters are afraid to testify.

The petition shall be on a form furnished by the trial court of the commonwealth, signed under the penalties of perjury and filed in the same court as the action sought to be sealed.

A renter seeking to seal a case must go back to the court where they were evicted and get a form. Some forms may now be ordered by mail. All forms cost money, unless a renter knows to file an affidavit of indigency.

If an action was active in more than 1 court during its pendency, then a petition may be filed in each such court.

A renter may seal records in all applicable courts. For example, a case filed in district court might have been transferred to housing court.

Notice need not be given to parties to the original action.

A renter doesn’t have to notify the evictor landlord that they’re seeking to seal a case.

The court shall comply with the petitioner’s request to seal the court record pursuant to this subsection; provided, however, that the record only pertains to a no-fault eviction and the action to which the record relates has concluded with all rights of appeal exhausted.

The court has no discretion here; the paperwork is a formality.

If no objection is filed by a party within 7 days of filing the petition, such court may, in its discretion, process such petitions administratively without a hearing.

A landlord only has 7 days to file an objection. The court is free to have a hearing, but there’s really no point because they must comply. And without notice, the landlord won’t find out. So, there will be no hearing.

(c) A person having a court record in an eviction action for nonpayment of rent on file in a court may, on a form furnished by the trial court and signed under the penalties of perjury, petition the court to seal the court record.

Nonpayment evictions may be sealed in 4 years (read on).

A renter may ask to seal a nonpayment eviction.

The petition shall be filed in the same court as the action sought to be sealed.

Like a no-fault eviction, the renter must go back to the court where they were evicted.

If an action was active in more than 1 court during its pendency, then a petition may be filed in each such court.

A nonpayment case can be sealed in all applicable courts.

Notice shall be given to parties to the original action.

Now, unlike no-fault, someone must give notice to the original evictor landlord. Notice requires proof of delivery. This often necessitates hiring a constable or a sheriff.

Bad for even bad renters: To seal a no-fault case, the renter must pay someone to serve the landlord a notice.

The court shall comply with the petitioner’s request to seal the court record pursuant to this subsection; provided, however, that the action to which the record relates concluded, including exhaustion of all rights of appeal, not less than 4 years before the request

The courts must seal a nonpayment case if all of the following apply:

1.) the case and appeal ended more 4 or more years ago; AND

and no eviction action for nonpayment or lessor action has been brought against the petitioner within the commonwealth in the 4 years preceding the request;

2.) the renter hasn’t been filed against for nonpayment in the last 4 years; AND

Good for housing providers: Repeat offenders cannot have their cases sealed. After years of arguing against eviction sealing, one point sank in. Hooray!

provided further, that the petitioner certifies on the petition that the nonpayment of rent was due to an economic hardship and such economic hardship has rendered them unable to satisfy the judgment.

3.) the renter says they suffered economic hardship (not that they were indigent) and haven’t been able to pay off the landlord because of that hardship.

Arguably, when the cable company raises the subscription price on a renter barely making ends meet, that’s a hardship. Likely anything will count as a hardship.

Bad for the courts: There is more work to do to determine the renter’s hardship.

If no objection is filed by a party, the court may, in its discretion, process such petitions administratively without a hearing.

Here, the process gets murky. The evictor landlord has to be given notice, but the law is silent on when that notice is given relative to when the case may be filed. A renter in an eviction case gets up to one full rental period’s notice. Will an evictor landlord be given the same?

If an evictor landlord does not object in time, the courts will seal the case.

If an objection is filed by a party, within 7 days of filing the petition, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine the petitioner’s compliance with the foregoing conditions and may require the petitioner to complete a financial statement on a form furnished by the trial court.

The evictor landlord has a right to a hearing on why the case should not be sealed. Here there are no standards. Imagine the evictor landlord, still angry about a long, drawn-out eviction process, coming back to court and listing 101 reasons why the renter really did have that money or could have paid. Now our beleaguered court staff must hear the whole eviction all over again.

Bad for the courts: In order to seal a nonpayment case, the courts have to do a whole eviction hearing all over again.

(d) A person having a court record of a fault eviction on file in a court may, on a form furnished by the trial court and signed under the penalties of perjury, petition the court to seal the court record.

For-cause evictions can be sealed in 7 years.

This law provides a process to seal for-causes cases, especially those where the renter definitely did do the bad thing they were alleged to have done.

The petition shall be filed in the same court as the action sought to be sealed.

The renter who was evicted for cause must go back to that same court.

If an action was active in more than 1 court during its pendency, then a petition may be filed in each such court.

All applicable court records in all courts may be sealed.

Notice shall be given to parties to the original action.

The landlord must be notified. See above description about the ambiguity of what this means.

The court shall comply with the petitioner’s request to seal the court record pursuant to this subsection; provided, however, that the action to which the record relates concluded, including exhaustion of all rights of appeal, not less than 7 years before the request and no eviction action for fault or lessor action has been brought against the petitioner within the commonwealth in the 7 years preceding the request.

Here again the courts have little discretion. The record must be sealed as long as the case and all appeals finished 7 years ago or further back, and the renter has not been filed against for cause in the last 7 years.

Bad for the courts: In all of these provisions, the courts have to positively identify a renter. Is the “John Smith” before me the same as “John A. Smith” who was evicted for cause 3 years ago? That is impossible to determine, because unique identifiers like social security numbers are never attached to a court record. God forbid someone changes their name (e.g., through marriage), then this becomes a complete mess.

If no objection is filed by a party within 7 days of filing the petition, the court may, in its discretion, process the petition administratively without a hearing.

The prior landlord has 7 days (from some date unclear) to object.
  1. e) A person having a court judgment against them in a civil action commenced pursuant to section 19 of chapter 139 on file in a court may, on a form furnished by the trial court and signed under the penalties of perjury, petition the court to seal the court record.

If the case was for the less frequently used “common nuisance” law, then these evictions may also be sealed under certain circumstances.

The petition shall be filed in the same court as the action sought to be sealed.

The renter who was evicted for cause must go back to that same court.

If an action was active in more than 1 court during its pendency, then a petition may be filed in each such court.

All applicable court records in all courts may be sealed.

Notice shall be given to parties to the original action.

Again, the landlord must be notified. Again, the timing and method of this is still unclear.

The court shall schedule a hearing to determine whether: (i) the action to which the record relates concluded, including exhaustion of all rights of appeal, not less than 7 years before the request and no eviction action for fault, or action pursuant to said section of said chapter 139, has been brought against the petitioner within the commonwealth in the 7 years preceding the request, and such petitioner has not been convicted of any criminal offense referenced in said section 19 of said chapter 139 during such 7-year period;

If the case was for the less frequently used “common nuisance” law, then the records must be sealed only if there was no conviction for any common nuisance in the past 7 years, in any state or federally. Common nuisance means prostitution, lewdness, gambling, alcohol served to minors, bootlegging, threat of violence, drugs, firearms and other illegal weapons, and explosives.

Bad for the courts: Not only do they have to check all civil cases, but potentially someone has to check all criminal cases, too, for repeat offenders.

and (ii) the sealing of such record is in the interest of justice and public safety.

More things for the courts to determine.

Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, where the plaintiff did not obtain a judgment in its favor, the defendant may petition to seal the court record at any time after the conclusion of the action, including exhaustion of all rights of appeal.

All evictions dismissed or lost can be sealed immediately.

If an eviction is dismissed, or the final judgment is awarded for the renter (rare), then a case may be sealed.

(e1/2) A person having a court record of an eviction action that resulted in a dismissal or final judgment in favor of the defendant may petition the court to seal the court record at any time after the conclusion of the action, which shall include exhaustion of all rights of appeal. The petition shall be on a form furnished by the trial court, signed under the penalties of perjury and filed in the same court as the action sought to be sealed was initially filed.

No matter what kind of eviction was filed, if the renter wins in court, they may have their case sealed. Again, the renter must go back to the court where they were filed against.

(This is section “E-and-a-half” because there was no time to insert this section and update subsequent sections. This law was written as if by school children writing their book report the night before it was due having not read the book.)

If an action was active in more than 1 court during its pendency, then a petition may be filed in each such court.

All applicable records in all courts may be sealed.

Notice need not be given to parties to the original action.

The landlord need not receive notice.

The court may, in its discretion, process the petition administratively without a hearing.

The court can have a hearing about nothing, if they want, or they can just seal the record.

(f) Upon motion and for good cause shown, or as otherwise authorized by this section, court records sealed under this section may, at the discretion of the court and upon a balancing of the interests of the litigants and the public in nondisclosure of the information with the interests of the requesting party, be made available for public safety, scholarly, educational, journalistic or governmental purposes only;

Journalists, researchers and law enforcement must apply for access to court data.

If any police officer, journalist, researcher, teacher or government official wants access to any or all sealed records, they must petition the court for this access or find someone who already knows.

Note that MassLandlords researchers read all cases upon filing and will not be motioning the court for access to filing data, as all records are and will be in our possession already.

Bad for democracy: We need to see more of how our government operates, not less.
Bad for journalists: Dictatorships license journalists, and so does Massachusetts under this law. Courts now have to decide if you are “journalist enough” to have access to data.
Bad for law enforcement: Someone wanted for arrest who is couch surfing may be impossible to find until that landlord files a case for unauthorized occupants and puts their name into the record.

provided, however, that the personal identifying information of the parties involved in the action shall remain sealed unless the court determines that release of such information is appropriate under this subsection and necessary to fulfill the purpose of the request.

Personally identifiable information can never be released except by special permission.

Since MassLandlords vs. EOHLC 2024, some will argue that addresses are personally identifiable information. That wrong decision combined with this law sharply curtails the ability to geocode evictions to understand their effects in a peer-reviewed journal, which is exactly what MassLandlords staff were doing when the law passed. All this shows that most public officials don’t care about the pursuit of truth.

Nothing in this subsection shall be deemed to permit the release of personal identifying information for commercial purposes.

Sealed records may never be used for commercial purposes.

Most journalism is for commercial purposes. This law has a chilling effect on serious inquiries into court procedure, rental assistance administration and more.

Bad for journalists: Any newspaper seeking to make money with its reporting could be barred from data access under this clause.

(g) Nothing in this section shall prohibit the dissemination of information contained in a record sealed pursuant to this section as the court deems necessary or appropriate: (i) for the  collection of a money judgment;

Housing providers whose judgments have not been invalidated can still try to collect.

Despite all of the foregoing, if the landlord needs to divulge the sealed eviction to collect a judgment, and the debt has not already been canceled, they can do so. Judgments last for 20 years.

Good for housing providers: But saying this is “good” is like thanking a robber for only taking from the till and not breaking our window.

(ii) to pursue a criminal investigation; (iii) to pursue a criminal prosecution; or (iv) where information in the sealed record was entered into evidence in a criminal prosecution that resulted in a criminal charge.

If the sealed eviction is part of the investigation of a crime, or evidence in a court case about a crime, that information may be divulged.

(h) Nothing in this section shall prohibit a person or their representative from petitioning the court to obtain access to sealed eviction records in which the person is a party.

A renter or a landlord can see their court record even if sealed.

A renter or their representative can ask to access their record.

“Representative” in the context of this law means specifically the counterpart to a senator, specifically, the renter’s representative in general court or house legislator. This is clearly not what the writers had in mind, but once again, their true intent is easily misunderstood. The drafters likely meant “a renter or their agent.”

Good for the legislature: Drafting error in your favor! All representatives get to read eviction records about constituents. Enjoy!

(i) A consumer reporting agency shall not disclose the existence of, or information regarding, an eviction record sealed under this section or use information contained in a sealed court record as a factor to determine any score or recommendation to be included in a consumer report unless the court record was available for inspection with the court within 30 days of the report date.

Credit reporting and background check companies must not report on sealed cases, even if sealed after data collection occurs.

Consumer reporting agencies must be constantly vigilant to scrub their database of sealed records. Notice of sealing will not be given to consumer reporting agencies.

Many consumer reporting agencies will rightly drop even non-sealed eviction records from reports for fear of noncompliance.

Bad for credit reporting  and background check companies. A key service will be made unlawful.
Good for landlords. Because of careless drafting, we are not included in this definition. We are therefore still permitted to use sealed evictions in our scoring system if we find out about them another way. For instance, if a renter tells us their eviction was sealed, we can still disqualify them from housing because of this. Please continue to give equal housing opportunity by determining whether any such sealed eviction disclosed to you is still housing relevant.

A consumer reporting agency may include in a consumer report, information found in publicly available court records;

Credit reporting agencies can use unsealed court information.

provided, however, that the consumer report shall include a person’s full name, whether an eviction action was a fault eviction, a no-fault eviction or a lessor action and the outcome of any eviction action if such information is contained in the publicly available court record.

The consumer reporting agency must provide enough detail for a landlord to know roughly what the case was about and who won.

Information contained in a court record sealed under this section shall be removed from the consumer report or from the calculation of any score or recommendation to be included in a consumer report within 30 days of the sealing of the court record from which it is derived.

Again, consumer reporting agencies must now continually monitor all evictions to identify those that have gone missing from the public record and are now sealed.

Any consumer reporting agency that violates this subsection shall be liable to the person who is the subject of the consumer report in an amount equal to the sum of any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the violation and the costs of the action, including reasonable attorney’s fees.

A renter whose sealed eviction gets used against them can sue the credit reporting agency who inadvertently shared the sealed record. Attorneys will win, because their fees are included. Renters will win massively, because the damages incurred could be any number of years’ rent once denied the apartment of their dreams.

Very bad for credit reporting companies and background check companies. This opens the door to lawsuits and will have a chilling effect on the inclusion of any court history from Massachusetts.
Good for landlords. We were omitted from this definition. If we deny a renter on the basis of a sealed eviction discovered independently of the courts, we are not liable under this law. Note that Chapter 93A still applies and we may be found to be engaged in unfair or deceptive practices anyhow.

The attorney general shall enforce this subsection,

The attorney general will litigate on behalf of renters wrongly denied because of sealed eviction records.

and the remedies provided hereunder shall not be exclusive.

Other penalties, such as triple damages under Chapter 93A, as well as any other damages that someone may be able to find legal justification for, may be applied to consumer reporting agencies.

Nothing in this subsection shall waive the rights or remedies of any person under any other law or regulation.

Renters can hire their own attorney, too.

Chapter 93A calling for triple damages also applies.

(j) An application used to screen applicants for housing or credit that seeks information concerning prior eviction actions of the applicant shall include the following statement: “An applicant for housing or credit with a sealed record on file with the court pursuant to section 16 of chapter 239 of the General Laws may answer ‘no record’ to an inquiry relative to that sealed court record.”

Renters may sometimes lie about having been evicted.

Every rental application must be updated to include a phrase mandated by law, in English only, that says an applicant can lie about having an eviction if that record is sealed.

(Note: There is no provision made for applications written in any other language. This is a common mistake in Massachusetts legislation. We have no official language, so any law requiring a certain English language statement be used is prima facie unenforceable. Recommended best practice would be to have the person who translated your application include a translated version of this phrase.)

Bad for good renters: Housing providers will find it difficult to rely on court records or renter statements when screening tenants, so new neighbors will be more likely to smoke, have loud music, house a gang or who knows what.
Bad for the legislature: This will be added onto the heap of laws challengeable under federal discrimination protections for mandating the use of the English language in housing.

No party shall be liable for any violation of the foregoing provision unless such party has first been issued a written warning from the attorney general and has failed to address the violation within 90 days of such notice.

If a landlord does not have this provision on their application, they can get away with it if the attorney general has not given them a warning and 90 days to fix the issue.

The petition provided by the court for the sealing of records as provided under this section and any order granting such petition shall contain the following notice: “An applicant for housing or credit with a sealed record on file with the court pursuant to section 16 of chapter 239 of the General Laws may answer ‘no record’ to an inquiry relative to that sealed court record.”

When the court issues an order to themselves to seal a record, they must notify themselves about the renter’s right to lie on an application. This section probably means to notify the renter, but this does not specifically say the renter will receive the order to seal any record.

(k) A party who obtains a judgment or enters into an agreement in an eviction action solely for nonpayment of rent shall, not more than 14 days after satisfaction of the judgment or agreement, file with the court in which the judgment or agreement was entered a notice of satisfaction of the judgment or agreement.

Housing providers must report to the court when a judgment for money has been paid off.

Judgments in Massachusetts last for 20 years. If a nonpayment judgment is later paid down by the renter, then the landlord must notify the court that the renter did so. The courts then record this as “satisfaction of the judgment.”

The same applies to agreements, but since agreements for judgment are often satisfied on a continuous basis, this clause is unclear. For example, an agreement for judgment may be, “Pay all rent by the 5th.” Does the landlord have to file a satisfaction every month? That is probably not what the writers meant, but again, this law is poorly conceived.

Bad for housing providers: Continuing satisfaction of agreements may require continuous reporting to the court. Very old obligations may require a lawyer, if the landlord does not know how to proceed.

A party that has satisfied such judgment or agreement may, upon noncompliance with this subsection by the other party, file a petition for the judgment or agreement to be deemed satisfied, with notice to the parties to such action.

Debt cancellation: Renters can invalidate a court’s decision and a landlord’s legal claim.

If the landlord doesn’t file the satisfaction, the renter can petition the court to declare the judgment satisfied. Notice to the landlord must be given.

That sounds reasonable, except what happens if a renter is prepared to perjure themselves?

This is the scariest part of the whole law. This is very bad for housing providers: Court judgments may be invalidated by a renter saying they paid off a landlord. If they lie, precious little process will be available to detect the lie and protect the landlord’s legal claim.

The court shall comply with the petitioner’s request; provided, however, that the record only pertains to an action for nonpayment of rent and the judgment or agreement has been satisfied.

Now the courts must have a whole trial to determine if the renter did in fact satisfy the judgment.

This section is akin to hearing the eviction a second time. Now the courts have to determine whether a renter did pay (as opposed to an eviction, where they determine whether a renter didn’t pay).

Any renter can petition to have their debt canceled, even if they haven’t paid it off. It will be up to the landlord to object.

If no objection is filed by a party within 7 days of filing the petition, the court may, in its discretion, process such petition administratively without a hearing.

The landlord has 7 days to object and start the debt cancellation proceedings. If they don’t, then debt cancellation is automatic.

This creates a process for renters to invalidate prior court judgments well before the 20-year collection deadline.  That’s ample opportunity for litigation against the commonwealth under the takings clause of the constitution.

Upon the filing of a notice of satisfaction of judgment or an agreement, or court judgment deeming the judgment or agreement satisfied, a party may petition the court to seal the court record pertaining to that action.

Evictions with a satisfied judgment will be sealed immediately.

If an evictor landlord notifies the court that the judgment has been satisfied, or if the renter wins their debt cancellation, then the record may be sealed.

The petition shall be on a form furnished by the trial court, signed under the penalties of perjury and filed in the same court as the action sought to be sealed.

There will be paperwork to start sealing following debt cancellation.

If an action was active in more than 1 court during its pendency, a petition may be filed in each such court.

All courts can have their judgments reversed and debts cancelled.

Notice shall be given to parties to the original action.

The original landlord must be notified.

The court shall comply with the petitioner’s request and seal the court record if the judgment or agreement has been satisfied and the action has concluded, with all rights of  appeal exhausted and with no objection filed by a party within 7 days of filing the petition.

The court has no discretion about reversing a judgment. The landlord has 7 days to object.

The court may process such petitions administratively without a hearing.

If there is no objection, no hearing is required.

 

Advertisement

For Members

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement