Massachusetts Federal Court Holds Alleged Retaliation for Regulatory Reporting May Support Chapter 93A Liability

Short summary

A Massachusetts federal court ruled that retaliatory contract termination in response to legally mandated regulatory reporting can support a Chapter 93A unfair business practices claim. The court found that whether a termination was motivated by retaliation is a jury question, not something to dismiss at the motion stage. The decision creates liability risk for companies that terminate contractors or employees for complying with legal reporting obligations.

• •Court held retaliatory termination following regulatory reporting violates Chapter 93A
• •Retaliation questions survive motions to dismiss and go to jury
• •Creates liability for terminating contractors or employees for legal compliance

Generated with AI, which can make mistakes.