ARTICLE
1 October 2025

Federal District Court Draws Clearer Line On Evidence Needed For Actual And Nominal Damages In Chapter 93A Claims

GT
Greenberg Traurig, LLP

Contributor

Greenberg Traurig, LLP has more than 2,850 attorneys across 49 locations in the United States, Europe, the Middle East, Latin America, and Asia. The firm’s broad geographic and practice range enables the delivery of innovative and strategic legal services across borders and industries. Recognized as a 2025 BTI “Best of the Best Recommended Law Firm” by general counsel for trust and relationship management, Greenberg Traurig is consistently ranked among the top firms on the Am Law Global 100, NLJ 500, and Law360 400. Greenberg Traurig is also known for its philanthropic giving, culture, innovation, and pro bono work. Web: www.gtlaw.com.
The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts recently granted, in part, a motion for summary judgment in Powers v. Receivables Performance Management, LLC limiting the plaintiff's damages in her Chapter 93A case to nominal damages. No. 4:21-cv-12125-MRG, 2025 LX 444693 (D. Mass. Sep. 25, 2025).
United States Consumer Protection

The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts recently granted, in part, a motion for summary judgment in Powers v. Receivables Performance Management, LLC limiting the plaintiff's damages in her Chapter 93A case to nominal damages. No. 4:21-cv-12125-MRG, 2025 LX 444693 (D. Mass. Sep. 25, 2025).

In Powers, a debt collection agency allegedly called a debtor an impermissible number of times and the plaintiff alleged a subsequent emotional distress injury. The plaintiff had no documents or medical records evidencing her emotional distress, nor any allegation of economic harm. Defendant accordingly moved for summary judgment. The district court held that the plaintiff's minimal evidence was enough to allege a cognizable injury, however, the district court also held that, as a matter of law, the plaintiff's evidence was onlyenough for nominal damages, not actual.

This case answers some questions for 93A litigants regarding what evidence plaintiffs need to proffer to prove actual damage when their alleged separate injury under Tyler v. Michaels Stores, Inc. is emotional distress. Absent additional evidence, they are limited to a recovery of nominal damages.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More