News & Events

Your Business Has Its Own Civil Rights Claim Under the MCRA

A recent decision by the Massachusetts Appeals Court helps to clarify how the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act (“MCRA”) applies at the intersection of land use, the right to seek permits, and agency law.  In Haverhill Stem LLC v. Jennings, Case No. 2025-P-1055 (July 13, 2026), the Appeals Court upheld an MCRA verdict in favor of an LLC, based on conduct directed at that LLC’s owner and operator, even though the MCRA claim by that individual failed.  The Appeals Court clarified how the MCRA applies when an LLC’s property rights are obstructed, and provided important lessons for landowners and business owners who may bring MCRA claims in the future.

Summary of the Dispute

Haverhill Stem LLC (“Stem”) is a state-licensed cannabis retailer in Haverhill, Massachusetts, owned and managed by Caroline Pineau. The defendants, Lloyd Jennings and Brad Brooks, owned the building next door. When Pineau announced plans to open a dispensary, the defendants demanded $30,000—later escalating to $75,000—for a deck they had previously built on Stem’s leased premises. Over roughly a year, the defendants attempted to extract payment through increasingly aggressive conduct, including threats to “destroy” Pineau financially, take her home, and file a RICO lawsuit. They also falsely told community leaders that Pineau owed them money and triggered repeated regulatory inspections that delayed Stem’s opening by six to eight months, costing roughly $1 million per month in lost revenue.

Stem and Pineau both sued under the MCRA, G. L. c. 12, § 11I, which creates a civil cause of action when someone’s exercise of constitutional or statutory rights is interfered with by threats, intimidation, or coercion. In December 2024, a jury found for Stem—the LLC, not Pineau individually—against defendant Jennings on the MCRA claim, awarding $7,500. On appeal, the Appeals Court affirmed, establishing an important principle about who can bring an MCRA claim and how.

The Key Principle: Threaten the Owner, Harm the Business

The Appeals Court held that a business entity can maintain its own independent MCRA claim when threats, intimidation, or coercion are directed at the individual who serves as its agent, even if that individual’s personal MCRA claim fails. The reasoning draws on the principle of agency law that a business can only act through its human representatives.  Because an LLC like Stem can only exercise its rights through its sole member and manager, threatening or intimidating conduct aimed at that person can interfere with the entity’s own constitutionally protected rights (here, the right to use property and seek permits).

This analysis builds on prior cases, like Howcroft v. Peabody (2001) and Pheasant Ridge Associates v. Burlington (1987), that said business entities are included as “persons” under the MCRA, with their own constitutionally protected property and permitting rights. The entity and the individual can seek to protect different protected interests, and each can pursue their own separate, independent claim.

Takeaway for Landowners

If you own real property in Massachusetts, you have a constitutionally protected right to use that property and to seek permits (though there is no guarantee any permit will be granted). That means threats, intimidation, or coercion aimed at stopping you from exercising those rights can support an MCRA claim, whether the threats target you personally or the entity through which you hold or develop the property.

If a neighbor, competitor, or abutting landowner confronts you with demands for money, threatens litigation to block your permit, or contacts regulators to manufacture delays—as the defendants did in the Stem case—document everything. Record who made the threat, what was specifically threatened, where and when it happened, and how the threat relates to your specific attempted use of the property. That contemporaneous record could become the foundation of an MCRA claim for you and your business entity.

Takeaway for Business Owners

If you are the sole or managing member of an LLC—or a closely held business with a small management team—and someone threatens or intimidates you to prevent your business from operating, opening, or obtaining permits, your business itself may have an independent MCRA claim, separate from any personal claim you might bring. This is true even if your personal claim ultimately fails.

This matters strategically. In Haverhill Stem, Pineau’s individual MCRA claim did not succeed—but the LLC’s did, because the jury concluded the threats interfered with the business’s rights to use its property and pursue its permits. For small businesses, this creates a second avenue of recovery and an additional plaintiff at trial. To maximize this opportunity:

• Bring suit in the entity’s name in addition to (or instead of) your individual name.
• Document how threats to you personally impacted business operations—delayed permits, lost revenue, stalled openings, increased costs.
• Preserve evidence showing you act as the entity’s agent: operating agreements, signing authority, permit applications filed in the entity’s name through you as manager.

* * *

Haverhill Stem LLC v. Jennings confirms that threats, intimidation, or coercion to the agent of a business can create liability under the MCRA to that business. For landowners and business owners facing this kind of conduct, this means an additional, independent legal tool. It also means potential litigants should pay careful attention to how claims are structured, how discovery is conducted, how verdicts are returned, and how settlements are drafted.