UNITEDSTATESCOURTOFAPPEALS FORTHEFIRSTCIRCUIT No. 96-2294 MARTIN A. DALE, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. H.B. SMITH COMPANY, INC., Defendant, Appellee. No. 96-2330 MARTIN A. DALE, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. H.B. SMITH COMPANY, INC., Defendant, Appellee. No. 97-1208 MARTIN A. DALE, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. H.B. SMITH COMPANY, INC., Defendant, Appellee. APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Kenneth P. Neiman, U.S. Magistrate Judge] Before Stahl, Circuit Judge, Cyr, Senior Circuit Judge, and Lynch, Circuit Judge. Neva Kaufman Rohan, with whom Robinson, Donovan, Madden & Barry, P.C. was on brief for appellant. Peter J. Stasz for appellee. February 17, 1998 2 CYR, Senior Circuit Judge. Plaintiff Martin A. Dale challenges various district court rulings relating to a parcel of commercial real estate located in Westfield, Massachusetts. Defendant H.B. Smith Co., Inc., a former occupant, cross-appeals. We affirm the district court judgment, in part, and vacate and remand in part. I BACKGROUND Dale acquired title to the property in 1980, subject to a preexisting lease between his predecessor in title and Interna- tional Harvestor Company ("International") and a preexisting sublease between International and PCP Realty Trust ("Realty Trust"). On December 31, 1983, International assigned its leasehold interests in the property to Dale, including its rights as sublessor to Realty Trust. Realty Trust thereafter remitted $1,500 per month to Dale, representing the rent due International under its sublease. Several years later Realty Trust sublet the property to cross-appellant Smith at $9,433.67 per month. On September 15, 1989, Dale initiated a successful state court action against Smith and Realty Trust to acquire summary possession of the property, claiming that Realty Trust had failed to renew the sublease with Dale (qua successor to International) in accordance with its terms. The state district court entered an order entitling Dale to recover possession based on its finding that the Realty Trust sublease had expired on May 31, 1989. Smith 3and Realty Trust appealed to the superior court before Dale could execute the district court judgment, which had been scheduled for August 1, 1990. Pursuant to the appeal bond, Smith was required to continue its regular monthly rent payments to Realty Trust. In turn, Realty Trust was to continue its rent payments to Dale and also escrow $7,933.67 monthly with the superior court, representing the difference between the $9,433.67 rental Realty Trust would receive directly from Smith and the $1,500 rental Realty Trust paid directly to Dale. Realty Trust and Smith ceased their payments as of January 1991. On May 1, 1991, the superior court appeals filed by Smith and Realty Trust were dismissed for failure to comply with the appeal bond. Although Realty Trust subsequently appealed the dismissal order, its appeal was dismissed on November 4, 1991. In due course, the superior court released the escrowed monies to Dale. On February 14, 1992, Dale reentered the property pursuant to the state court judgment. The present action was instituted by Dale in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts to recover damages from Smith for its use and occupancy of the property. Dale demanded damages equal to the rent prescribed in the Realty Trust- Smith sublease for each month in which Smith held over as a tenant at sufferance, together with the property taxes assessed during the same period. Dale alleged that Smith became a tenant at sufferance on June 1, 1989 4