And the advocates also argue that an additional 600 signatures were obtained through fraud or forgery. One person reportedly signed 300 different names, according to one plaintiff.

During court proceedings this week, lawyers for both groups of plaintiffs questioned registrars from municipalities around the state in an effort to establish whether signers were actually registered voters.

What's Next?

Members of both sides are predicting victory, but that doesn't matter. In the world of rent control, no one ever loses. There are always appeals.

Nadler, the attorney for the pro-rent control plaintiffs, said the trial has gone well for his side so far.

"They're cutting into [our numbers], but not as well as we expected," Nadler said.

But Malcolm L. Kaufman, a member of at least two pro-rent control groups in the city, was not so confident that his side will prevail.

"The judge seemed sympathetic to them [the anti-rent control plaintiffs]," Kaufman said. "It's somewhat disconcerting."

William A. McDermott Jr., the lawyer for the opponents of rent control, said in an interview that he is optimistic about the trial. But he added that it was too early to tell who would win.

Nevertheless, "if the trial were to end today, we would have enough signatures," McDermott added.

The trial is expected to last at least one more week.

Bill Cavellini, a Cambridge taxi-driver who is a member of the Campaign for Affordable Housing and Tenant Protections and a plaintiff in the pro-rent control suit, said that an appeal in the highly contentious case is likely.

But Cavellini noted that any appeal will have to be conducted quickly. The November ballot is scheduled to be certified at the state constitutional convention in June.

If the referendum is put on the ballot, rent control supporters like Cavellini fear that opponents will have greater resources to finance a statewide campaign against the rent limits.

Cavellini said rent control opponents have "unlimited resources."