H1 Lincoln, Again

The SJC in its 2022 decision in H1 Lincoln v. South Washington Street, LLC, held that a breach of contract will constitute a 93A, § 11, violation where it is accompanied by some paradigm of 93A conduct such as “commercial extortion” or “stringing along,” while restating that even an intentional or knowing breach of contract “alone” is not a 93A violation. H1 Lincoln v. South Washington Street, LLC, 489 Mass. 1, 19 & note 11 and 20 n. 12 (1/24/22) (“As we have already explained, the use of breaches of contract and ‘stringing along’ as tactics of commercial extortion is actionable as unfair conduct under G.L. c. 93A, § 11.”; at n. 11: “We note that a ‘breach of contract alone does not amount to an unfair act or practice under G.L. c. 93A, § 2’…. To the extent that the trial judge’s decision suggests that an intentional breach alone was enough to constitute and unfair act or practice under G.L. c. 93A, § 11, it was incorrect.”; at n. 12: “We again note that a breach of contract, even if intentional, does not in itself amount to an unfair act or practice under G.L. c. 93A, § 11.”)