Not under the lease in this case. The lease defined the premises by an attached site plan, and the court held the tenant was limited to the area shown, even though the drawing was rough and even though later permits and the former landlord’s conduct pointed to more. The Appeals Court upheld summary judgment for a new property owner against a tenant that wanted to build a concrete plant on land outside the leased area. This is an unpublished Appeals Court decision under Rule 23.0, which courts may cite as persuasive but not as binding precedent.
What happened
In 2003, the tenant leased two portions of a Wilmington property from the company that ran a cement terminal there. The lease defined the leased premises by an attached site plan with hand drawn boundaries. The lease term was to begin once the tenant got permits to run a concrete plant. The tenant’s later permit plan called for building outside the drawn boundaries, and the town eventually issued special permits in 2020. Meanwhile, in 2019, a competitor bought the property, took over the lease, and told the town the tenant could use only the areas on the site plan. The tenant sued, and the new owner asked the court to declare the tenant had no rights outside those areas.
What the court decided
The Appeals Court affirmed in Tresca Brothers Sand & Gravel, Inc. v. Eames Street, LLC, No. 24-P-1319 (Mass. App. Ct. December 2, 2025) (Rule 23.0 decision).
The lease was not ambiguous. Whether a contract is ambiguous is a question of law, decided first from the words of the document alone. Bank v. Thermo Elemental Inc., 451 Mass. 638 (2008). The court agreed that the hand drawn site plan was imprecise, but that did not make it ambiguous. It clearly showed the parties leased only part of the property.
Permits did not expand the premises. The lease said the premises included permits appurtenant to them. The tenant argued that the 2020 permits, issued seventeen years later for a larger plant, became part of the premises. The court disagreed. The permit clauses referred to operating on the premises as defined, not to enlarging them.
Conduct could not create ambiguity. The tenant pointed to the old landlord’s help with the permit applications and its permission to prepare land outside the plan. Courts do not use outside evidence to create an ambiguity when the plain language is clear. General Convention of the New Jerusalem in the U.S. of Am., Inc. v. MacKenzie, 449 Mass. 832 (2007). An expert report on commercial leasing custom was not in the summary judgment record, so the court could not consider it.
No valid amendment. The lease could be changed only by a writing signed by both parties. When a contract sets the method for changing it, an attempt that does not follow that method is invalid. Bright Horizons Children’s Ctrs., Inc. v. Sturtevant, Inc., 82 Mass. App. Ct. 482 (2012). A lease is also covered by the Statute of Frauds, G.L. c. 259, § 1, so it could not be changed orally. And a party claiming an oral change must show the parties actually agreed to its terms. Sea Breeze Estates, LLC v. Jarema, 94 Mass. App. Ct. 210 (2018). The old landlord’s designated witness testified the lease was never amended.
Other claims. The tenant’s interference claims failed because the lease was still in effect and binding on the new owner, and a party to a contract cannot be liable for interfering with it. Blackstone v. Cashman, 448 Mass. 255 (2007). Its late request to add new claims was properly denied for undue delay. Nguyen v. Massachusetts Inst. of Tech., 479 Mass. 436 (2018).
What this means for you
The landlord side won, and the lesson for small business tenants is clear. The lease document controls. If your business plan needs more space than the lease plan shows, side conversations, a landlord’s cooperation, or new permits will not usually change your rights. That matters most when the property is sold, because a new owner may enforce the lease exactly as written.
The case also shows the cost of procedural missteps. Evidence left out of the summary judgment record, and claims added late, could not help the tenant.
What to do now
- Read the description of the premises in your lease and any attached plan. Know exactly what area you control.
- If you need more space, get a written lease amendment signed by both sides, following the lease’s own amendment clause.
- Do not rely on oral promises or a landlord’s help with permits as proof of extra rights.
- If your property is sold, review your lease right away and assume the new owner will enforce it to the letter.
- If a dispute starts, get legal help early so key evidence and claims are raised on time.
If this is your situation, call Doubleday Law at (617) 575-2006 or tell us what happened. These cases move on short deadlines.
