🍾 Service Matters: Appeals Court Vacates Default Judgment in Malden Liquor Store Eviction

In a decision entered October 30, 2026, the Massachusetts Appeals Court affirmed the Appellate Division’s ruling that a default judgment against an LLC tenant was void for lack of proper service. The case, 100 Maplewood Street LLC v. LLAWM-Malden, LLC (26-P-49), underscores that even in summary process actions, landlords must strictly comply with the rules for serving process on a corporation.

The dispute involved a retail lease at 888 Eastern Avenue in Malden. The tenant intended to operate a liquor store, and the lease delayed the start of rent until the tenant obtained approvals from the City of Malden and the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission (ABCC). After the city denied the license and the ABCC remanded with a recommendation to grant it, the city sought judicial review in Superior Court. That effort failed because the city had not exhausted its administrative remedies. Treating the Superior Court’s decision as the equivalent of a license grant, the landlord demanded rent. The tenant refused, citing the lack of an actual license, and the landlord filed a summary process action.

Service was attempted by posting the summons and complaint on vacant storefronts at the property. The landlord later obtained a default judgment for possession and roughly $33,000 in rent. The tenant, unaware of the case while continuing to pursue licensing, later moved for relief under Mass. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(4), arguing the judgment was void. After the District Court denied the motion, the Appellate Division reversed and dismissed the action. The Appeals Court agreed.

Under Mass. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2), service on a domestic corporation requires delivery to an officer, managing or general agent, or person in charge of the business (or another authorized agent). Posting on an unoccupied storefront did not satisfy this requirement. The landlord’s alternative claim of certified-mail service to the tenant’s Marshfield address also failed: the record lacked a signed return receipt, the lease’s general notice clause did not waive formal service requirements, the landlord had prior notice that the Marshfield address was undeliverable, and the landlord never sought an order of notice after diligent search. Without valid service, the District Court lacked personal jurisdiction, rendering the default judgment void.

The court denied the tenant’s request for attorney’s fees and double costs, finding that while the landlord’s appeal was close to the line, it was not frivolous.

For commercial landlords, the decision is a reminder that shortcuts in service—especially against LLCs whose principal place of business may be hard to reach—risk void judgments and wasted time. For tenants, it reaffirms that a default entered without proper service can be set aside under Rule 60(b)(4), even after significant delay. Summary process moves quickly, but the foundational requirement of valid service does not.