── Ducharme v. Mobile Home Rent Control Board of Chicopee ──
Court: Massachusetts Appeals Court
Date: May 22, 2026
Category: General
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal
revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound
volumes of the Official Reports. If you find a typographical
error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of
Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1
Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557-
1030;
[email protected]
24-P-1132 Appeals Court
LINDA DUCHARME vs. MOBILE HOME RENT CONTROL BOARD OF CHICOPEE
& another.1
No. 24-P-1132.
Hampden. October 8, 2025. – May 22, 2026.
Present: Meade, Neyman, Walsh, JJ.
Mobile Home. Manufactured Housing Community. Municipal
Corporations, Special act, Rent control. Administrative
Law, Hearing, Judicial review, Standing, Substantial
evidence. Housing Court, Jurisdiction. Jurisdiction,
Housing Court. Rent Control, Mobile home, Rent increase,
Judicial review. Practice, Civil, Review of action of rent
control board, Review of administrative action, Standing.
Civil action commenced in the Western Division of the
Housing Court Department on March 3, 2023.
The case was heard by Jonathan J. Kane, J., on motions for
judgment on the pleadings.
Ryan K. O'Hara for the intervener.
Daniel Ordorica for the plaintiff.
Mark J. Albano, for the defendant, was present but did not
argue.
1 Jean Real Estate, Inc., intervener.
2
NEYMAN, J. The plaintiff, Linda Ducharme, brought an
action in the Housing Court for review of a decision by the
mobile home rent control board of Chicopee (board) allowing the
defendant intervener, Jean Real Estate, Inc. (Jean), to increase
rent in three manufactured housing communities (parks). On
cross motions for judgment on the pleadings, a Housing Court
judge determined that due to technological issues with an
Internet-based video conferencing platform used during the
public hearing and inaudible portions of the resulting audio
recording and transcript, the board's decision must be set aside
because it was "in violation of constitutional provisions and
made upon unlawful procedure."
On appeal, Jean argues that the Housing Court lacked
jurisdiction over the matter, the plaintiff had standing only to
challenge the board's decision as to the one park where she is a
tenant, the plaintiff's substantial rights were not violated at
the hearing, the plaintiff waived her objections to the
technological issues at the hearing, and that the board's
decision was supported by substantial evidence. For the reasons
discussed herein, we vacate the judgment and remand for further
findings by the board only as to the park where the plaintiff
resides.
Background. 1. Regulatory scheme. In 1977, the
Legislature, through a special act, declared "a serious public
3
emergency" with respect to housing in the city of Chicopee
(city) "created by excessive, abnormally high and unwarranted
rental increases imposed by some owners of mobile parks located
therein." St. 1977, c. 596, § 1. To address the emergency, the
Legislature authorized the city to establish the board to
regulate rents in manufactured housing communities. See
St. 1977, c. 596, § 2.
The board is permitted to make individual or general
adjustments to rents to ensure that park owners receive a "fair
net operating income" for the units. St. 1977, c. 596, § 3 (a).
The special act and the related city ordinance define fair net
operating income as
"that income which will yield a return, after all
reasonable operating expenses, on the fair market value of
the property equal to the debt service rate generally
available from institutio