Judge Balances Liability and Circumstances
While Justice Kazanjian found Walsh engaged in “unfair or deceptive acts,” she declined the attorney general’s bid to tack on an $8.5 million civil penalty or claw back Walsh’s $1.5 million retention payment. She noted that Walsh’s conduct unfolded during “a period of worldwide uncertainty” and that other corporate actors also shared blame.
Still, she concluded Walsh “at the very least” approved decisions that violated consumer protection laws, making him personally accountable.
Attorney General Celebrates, Walsh Pushes Back
Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell praised the ruling:
“After years of litigation and a multiweek trial, I am proud of my team for securing meaningful relief for Massachusetts consumers who were unfairly charged for services they could not use.”
Walsh’s attorneys countered that he acted in good faith amid chaos, accusing prosecutors of “hindsight bias.” They argued he believed shutdowns might only last weeks and that business could bounce back quickly.
