massachusetts case law research

Massachusetts Legal Research

Getting started-massachusetts practice pages and general research guides, general information, sources for massachusetts cases, courts documents, appellate records and briefs, data files of cases, constitutional law, legislation, legislative history, administrative law generally, agency decisions by agency/topic, municipal law, court rules, general sources, child advocacy, civil practice, corporate/business law, criminal law, labor and employment law, landlord and tenant/real estate, professional responsibility, news and other periodicals, researching attorneys and judges, selected books, finding old cases and court records, digital projects and catalogs, other resources, getting help, introduction.

This guide is designed to highlight selected resources for doing legal research in Massachusetts. It is designed primarily for Harvard Law School students, staff and faculty.    At present,  it focuses on Massachusetts state materials and not materials related to the federal courts in Massachusetts.

Much of our Massachusetts collection is on the 4th floor of Langdell, but much is stored offsite in the Harvard Depository, in Reference, in Special Collections, on microfilm/microfiche or shelved elsewhere.  Increasingly, we are acquiring more of our Massachusetts materials in electronic format.  This guide is intended as a starting place to highlight some of the more popular resources we have.  Check Hollis for more materials.

An amazing resource for Massachusetts legal information is the Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries .  They are also open to members of the public and are happy to help them with research questions.

CALI Lesson-Massachusetts Primary Legal Research

• Massachusetts Primary Legal Research Access to the CALI Lessons is limited to the Harvard Law School community. In order to access the lessons, you must first register using an HLS CALI authorization code .

Subject Guide

Adapted in part from research guide written by Stephanie Burke Farne, former Harvard Law School Library Reference Librarian.

• Westlaw Massachusetts
• Lexis Massachusetts
• Westlaw Practical Law Massachusetts
• Law about guides (Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries)
• MassLegalServices Practice Areas Library
• Secondary sources and resources by topic

Popular Massachusetts citations for cases:

Mass. = Massachusetts Reports (for Supreme Judicial Court Decisions or "SJC")

Mass. App. Ct. = for Massachusetts Appeals Court Reports

N.E. or N.E.2d = Northeastern Reporter or Northeastern Reporter 2d. (Supreme Judicial Court and Mass. Appeals Court Decisions)

Mass. App. Div. = Reports of Massachusetts Appellate Division

See Table 1 of the Bluebook and SJC Style Manual for additional information about case citations.

Massachusetts Court System Charts and Websites

• Chart of Massachusetts Court System
• Massachusetts Appeals Court
• Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
• Executive Office of the Trial Courts

Court Statistics and Data Files

• Annual Report of the Massachusetts Trial Court
• Trial Court Case Statistics Directory
• Supreme Judicial Court Case Statistics
• Massachusetts Superior Court Files,.1859-1959

Search multiple Massachusetts courts

• Massachusetts Case Law (Justia)
• Google Scholar
• Opinion Archive (Reporter of Judicial Decisions) opinions of the SJC and Appeals Court released since 2001
• Slip Opinions (Reporter of Judicial Decisions) Slip opinions are available to the public shortly after 10 A.M. on days opinions are released. Most opinions are released within 130 days of oral argument. Slip opinions posted to the Web site are removed within two weeks then appear in advance sheet format in the Advance Sheet ($$$) and Opinion Archive sections of the site.
• Massachusetts Cases (Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries)
• Sources for Old Cases and Court Records
• Caselaw Access Project Only through mid-2018. Select Massachusetts as jurisdiction. See coverage .
• Courlistener
• NexisUni (Harvard login)
• Fastcase Premium (HeinOnline)

jury verdicts and settlements

Massachusetts supreme judicial court cases.

Note: For SJC cases from 1822-1867, the volumes of official reports were named for the repoter (e.g. Pick. for Pickering).  Section 2.02 SJC Style Manual provides guidance for using citations with these reporter names and also provides a table that converts Mass. Reports citations to these nominative reporter citations in Appendix 3.

• Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Reports (LLMC Digital) 1804-1923
• Massachusetts Cases (MassachusettsTrial Court Law Libraries)

Massachusetts Appeals Court Cases

Massachusetts Appeals Court cases are officially published in the Massachusetts Appeals Court reports by the Office of the Reporter for Judicial Decisions and in the Northeastern Reporter.

The court also issues "unpublished" orders under Rule 1:28 (known as "Rule 1:28 orders").  A court decision and rule change has made it possible to cite them in some circumstances.  The rule change: "If, in a brief or other filing, a party cites to an order issued under this rule, the party shall cite the case title, a citation to the Appeals Court Reports where issuance of the order is noted, and a notation that the order was issued pursuant to this rule; in addition, a party citing such an order shall include the full text of the order as an addendum to the brief or other filing. No such order issued before February 26, 2008, may be cited."

• Massachusetts Appeals Court: A Pathfinder (Western New England School of Law)
• Website for the Office of Reporter of Decisions The Office of the Reporter of Decisions maintains a website with cases ( slip opinions and an archive of opinions from the Appeals Court, but they are not considered the official versions. They also have unpublished decisions pursuant to Rule 1:28 . The advance sheets service requires a paid subscription.

Massachusetts Appellate Division for the Boston Municipal Court and District Courts

• Reports of Massachusetts appellate division : decisions of the Appellate Divisions of the District Courts and the Boston Municipal Court KFM 2451.A4 M375

Finding aids for cases

• Massachusetts Digest Annotated 1761 to 1985
• Treatises and Other Secondary Sources by Topic
• Shepards Massachusetts Citations (print) Law School KFM2459 .S53 Useful for citatings not covered online Lexis Shepards or on KeyCite.

Trial Courts

Massachusetts superior court.

• Massachusetts Law Reporter KFM 2448 .M37
• Social Law Library Online Cases
• Land Court Reporter KFM2512 .A515

Probate and Family Court

• Massachusetts Family Law Journal

Online Massachusetts Briefs & Records

• Supreme Judicial Court and Appeals Court of Massachusetts Public Case Information September 2007-present Briefs filed in most cases scheduled for argument are posted on this web site shortly before the sitting. Briefs are linked from the Case Docket page.
• Westlaw Massachusetts Briefs and Petitions Multibase (Westlaw login) 1999-present (selective) Combines the briefs databases of the Supreme Judicial Court and the Court of Appeals
• Westlaw Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Briefs and Petitions (Westlaw ID Required) 1990-present Briefs filed with the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts.
• Westlaw Massachusetts Appeals Court Briefs (Westlaw ID Required) 1999-present (selective) Briefs filed inn cases that are scheduled for argument before the Massachusetts Appeals Court.
• Lexis Advance Massachusetts Briefs, Pleadings and Motions (Lexis ID required) 2000-current (selected) more... less... Years Covered: 2000-present Contents: A collection of briefs and motions from the Supreme Judicial Court and the appellate courts.
• Lexis Courtlink SJC and Appeals Court with delay

Print/Microfilm Massachusetts Briefs & Records

• Massachusetts Records and Briefs of the Supreme Judicial Court (Microfilm) Years covered: 1914 to 2007 (v.449 of Mass.) Location: Harvard Depository Contents: Records and briefs from cases receiving a full opinion reported in volume 219 of the Massachusetts Reports or higher. Materials are filed alphabetically by case name according to volume. (Currently two years out of date.)
• Massachusetts Appeals Court Records and Briefs (Microfilm) Years Covered: 1972 to 2010 (v.76 of Mass. App. Ct. reports) Location: Harvard Depository This set covers the records and briefs for cases receiving a full opinion reported in the Massachusetts Appeals Court Reports. They are organized alphabetically by case name according to volume. Find the appropriate item number and request through Hollis.

Oral Arguments and Transcripts

• Supreme Judicial Court Sitting List Realtime webcasts of oral arguments. Archived at Suffolk University Law School's website.
• SJC Oral Arguments Maintained by Suffolk University Law School, in cooperation with the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. Archives begin with 2019/2020 court year.
• Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court YouTube (Oral Arguments) Includes oral arguments between 2006 and 2019.
• State and Federal Oral Arguments (Westlaw) Run search and limit to Massachusetts.

Online Trial Court Filings

• Westlaw Massachusetts Civil Filings (Westlaw ID Required) 1998-present more... less... Years Covered: 1998-present Contents:Contains selected motions, trial court memoranda, trial pleadings and other civil trial filings from the Massachusetts state courts
• Westlaw Massachusetts Criminal Filings (Westlaw ID Required) 1999-present more... less... Years Covered: 1999-present Contents:Contains selected motions, trial court memoranda, trial pleadings and other criminal trial filings from the Massachusetts state courts

Online Dockets

• How to search court dockets
• Massachusetts Trial Court Electronic Case Access Land Court, Probate and Family Court (Estates and Admin), Housing Courts, BMC, District and Superior Courts are available without log in. There is an Attorney Portal for information from additional trial courts with appropriate credentials.
• Public Case Information web site of the Supreme Judicial Court and Appeals Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
• Massachusetts Trial Court Information Center Requires appropriate credentials. No access through library.

Historical court records

See  Finding old court cases and records  under Massachusetts Legal History.

IQSS Dataverse

• Massachusetts Superior Court Files, 1859-1959 Suffolk and Hampshire counties

The Massachusetts Constitution is the oldest written constitution in effect in the United States. It sets forth the rights of individuals in the " Declaration of Rights, Part I , " and the form of government in " The Frame of the Government, Part II . " The Constitution can be amended by a special constitutional convention, the legislature or by popular initiative. There are over 100 amendments in the " Articles of Amendment . "

• Massachusetts State Constitution (Oxford Commentaries on the State Constitutions of the United States)

Text of the Constitution

• Constitution or Form of Government for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (Westlaw) annotated version of Massachusetts Constitution
• Annotated Constitution of Massachusetts (Lexis)

Constitutional Convention and Historical Documents

• State constitutional conventions from independence to the completion of the present Union, 1776-1959; a bibliography,
• State constitutional conventions, commissions & amendments, 1959-1978 : an annotated bibliography
• State constitutional conventions, revisions, and amendments, 1959-1976 : a bibliography
• Journal of debates and proceedings in the convention of delegates chosen to revise the constitution of Massachusetts : begun and holden at Boston, November 15, 1820, and continued by adjournment to January 9, 1821 (1853)
• Debates and proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, held in the year 1788: and which finally ratified the Constitution of the United States.
• Constitutional conventions (State Library Dspace repository)

Selected resources

• Massachusetts Considers Ratifying the U.S. Constitution (Mass. Historical Society)
• A history of the Constitution of Massachusetts (1917)
• John Adams and the Massachusetts Constitution

The Massachusetts legislature has one session per year. Laws that are enacted are published chronologically in the Massachusetts Acts and Resolves (session laws).     They are then arranged by subject in the general laws (code). See our Legislative History section for information about bills (laws that are not yet enacted).

• Massachusetts Legislature

Statutes-Finding Aids

• Laws by Popular Name (Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries)
• See Treatises and Other Sources by Topic

Session Laws

• Massachusetts Acts and Resolves in pdf; 1692-1939; 1941-2009; from Massachusetts State Library
• Massachusetts Acts and Resolves 1997-2008 (HTML only)(from Massachusetts legislature)
• Session Law Index (Massachusetts Legislature) Acts back to 1997 Resolves back to 2001
• Massachusetts Acts and Resolves (HeinOnline) in pdf; back to 1661 (includes Massachusetts Colony)

General Laws of Massachusetts - Official (G.L.)

• General Laws of Massachusetts KFM2429 .M37 (superseded editions in stacks)
• General Laws from the Massachusetts legislature

Massachusetts General Laws Annotated (West) (M.G.L.A.)

• Massachusetts General Laws Annotated (print) KFM2430 1958 .A42 Superseded vols at Harvard Depository and on micro.

Annotated Laws of Massachusetts (Lexis) (A.L.M.)

• Annotated Laws of Massachusetts Law School KFM2430 1932 .A2 Superseded volumes at Harvard Depository

Early Codes

• Tercentenary edition of the general laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, comprising the general laws enacted December 22, 1920, to take effect January 1, 1921, as amended prior to January 1, 1932
• The General Laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, enacted December 22, 1920 : to take effect January 1, 1921 http://www.archive.org/details/generallawsofcom01mass http://www.archive.org/details/generallawsofcom02mass http://archive.org/details/generallawsofcom02mass
• Revised Laws (1902) http://www.archive.org/details/revisedlawsofcom01mass http://www.archive.org/details/revisedlawsofcom02mass
• Public Statutes (1882)
• General Statutes (1860)
• Revised Statutes (1836)
• Making of Modern Law (Primary Sources)
• State Statutes - A Historical Archive HeinOnline has several editions of old Massachusetts codes.

Colonial Laws

• The colonial laws of Massachusetts. Reprinted from the edition of 1672, with the supplements to 1686.
• Colonial Laws of Massachusetts. Reprinted from the Edition of 1660, with the Supplements to 1672. Containing Also, the Body of Liberties of 1641
• The book of the general lauues and libertyes concerning the inhabitants of the Massachusets collected out of the records of the General Court for the several years wherin they were made and established, and now revised by the same Court and disposed into Available in other editions/printings-Check Hollis.
• Massachusetts Legislative History
• How an Idea Becomes a Law
• A Guide to Gathering and Using Legislative History in Massachusetts p. 4-19
• A Guide to Tracing Massachusetts Legislative History video from Massachusetts State Library

Terminology and other resources

• Massachusetts Legislative Glossary
• Lawmaking in Massachusetts-Glossary of Terms
• Legislative Drafting Manual

Bill tracking

• Bills (Massachusetts legislature) Click "bill history" tab. Bills may be followed/tracked by registering for and using the My Legislature service. You may also sign up for "interests" to track bills/hearings under select broad topics. If you add your address it will also identify bills impacting your geographic area. Default is to current General Court. Click Reset General Court to search bills back to 186h General Court (2009/2010).
• Nexi Uni Access via Harvard Key. For non-Law Harvard affiliates without access to Lexis. Covers back to 1990. Run search and limit to Massachusetts. No prospective alerting available.
• Instatrac (Masstrac) Access is available on the Harvard Law School campus. Off-campus access is available to current HLS affiliates and controlled by Harvard Key. Bill-tracking back to 1995/1996. Bill comparison. Can search bills by category and status.
• Massachusetts Legislative and Regulatory Reports (Lexis)

Full-text bills

• Bills (Massachusetts Legislature) Default is to current General Court. Click Reset General Court to search bill back to 186h General Court (2009/2010).
• Massachusetts Legislative Documents 1780-2015/16 with gaps

Steps for doing a MA legislative history

1) Identify session law reference.  Consult the "historical notes" section of an annotated version of the Massachusetts General Laws for the particular statute you are researching.

2) Use the session law reference to identify bill number with one of the following:

• Legislature website for laws enacted back to 2009/10
• Westlaw  (back to 2005 in bill tracking/text and late 1980's for session laws) and Lexis (back to 1989 in bill tracking and 1990 in session laws)
• Journal of the House of Representatives and Journal of the Senate (See House and Senate Journals below): For bills after 1973, a bill history summary is included in the final volume.  
• session laws 
• Bulletin of Committee Work ( Harvard Depository 1915-1978): describes legislative committees' work through each session. In its yearly cumulative edition, it contains a table entitles "Acts and Resolves Approved by the Governor" which traces every session law back to its final bill number. 1925-1965 searchable in HathiTrust and GoogleBooks .
• Guide to Massachusetts General and Special Acts (not held at Harvard, but held by other area libraries)(1972-2008)

3) The Legislative Package 

Once you have a bill number and year, you can look for the "legislative package." This package contains the original petition filed with the Senate or House clerk, which is a simple form, along with the bill itself, including the text. In some rare cases, a statement of intent may be filed with the bill, printed at the top of the bill.  All petitioner names appear on the bill, as well as handwritten changes made by committees that reviewed the bill. The State Archives at Columbia Point maintain the documents comprising the legislative package for each bill introduced in the General Court . For very recent bills, check the General Court 's online information or contact the House or Senate clerk.

If the Governor has introduced a bill, a Governor's message will be filed with the House clerk and given a House bill number. Along with the proposed bill will be a "transmittal letter," which details the need for the bill. This is an extremely important document for determining intent of legislation, and is part of the legislative package.  Bills as proposed and filing letters of the current administration may be found on the governor's website .   Another source to examine when the Governor has proposed legislation is the annual message of the Governor, a program in accordance with which the governor may initiate bills throughout the legislative sessions, may be detailed. The annual message of the Governor is printed as Senate Bill 1 in the first year of a legislative session. The bill number varies in the second session.

Administrative agencies may file proposed legislation. The agencies' recommendations come with bill drafts, and are printed as the first series of bills within a year.

Special commissions may propose legislation as an appendix to a mandated report. Special Commission Reports may have House or Senate bill numbers. There is an index to Special Commission Reports, Index of Special Reports Authorized by the General Court ( 1900-1988 ) and Index to Special Reports (1988-March 1994).  The New England Law Boston Library has a selection of these reports on its website , as well as the   Massachusetts State Library .  Also, check HOLLIS to see which Special Commission Reports are available at Harvard libraries. You might also check the Official Publications of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts .

Committee hearings and debates

The indexes in each volume of the Journal of the House and the Journal of the Senate (see below) provide important information about the bill history which may lead to other material relevant to the bill's intent, including the committee assignment of the bill, the date of public hearings, and the dates of debate on the chamber floor. If the bill is from the current session, a bill history may be available online.

Bills introduced into the House or Senate are referred to committees whose topics most closely align with that of the bill. Public hearings must be held on every bill referred to a committee. Videotapes of selected hearings produced by WGBH , the local PBS station, under contract with the General Court, are official sources for those hearings.  These videotapes are catalogued and searchable at the State Library . Selective committee hearings from 2007 on appear on the legislative website .   The State House News Service is an unofficial print and electronic source of selected hearings. Written testimony submitted to the committee for hearings are included in bill folders, which may or may not be deposited by the committee in the State Archives . The committee should be contacted directly to determine if that is its practice.  

If the bill is favorably reported out to the first committee, it received its "first reading" and goes to any other committee it may have to be sent on to. If it survives, it receives a "second reading", which means that there is the opportunity for debate on the floor of the chambers. This is an important step for researchers in determining the intent of the bill. The State Library has the official audiotape and videotape records of the proceedings of the House, which includes these floor debates, beginning in November 1984. Senate proceedings are available from 1994. The unofficial State House News Servic e has transcribed debates since 1972. However, do not be surprised if the "debate" is extremely brief.   

Masstrac/Instatrac has transcripts (written and recorded) back to the mid-2000's.  

After the "second reading" procedural step, members of the chamber are asked if the bill should go to the Committee on Third Readings ( House or Senate ). If the bill is sent to the Committee, it may undergo technical changes, change in citation form or even review for Constitutional issues. The bill is then sent back to the chamber floor where it may be debated again. If amendments are made, the bill will be sent back to the Committee on Third Readings ( House or Senate ) for re-examination. If the bill "passed to be engrossed," it is sent on to the other chamber to undergo the same process all over again.

Governor materials

If both chambers of the legislature enact the bill, it is sent along to the Governor's Office for approval. The Governor's staff prepares a summary analysis of the bill, including its impact if passed. These papers constitute the Governor's Legislative Files. During the Governor's term of office, these may be obtained from the Governor's Office. The papers of previous administrations may be obtained from the State Archives. These papers do not provide evidence of legislative intent because they issue from the executive office. If the Governor returns the bill with amendment, it takes the form of a "Governor's Message" and becomes a bill itself. A transmittal letter will accompany the amendment, which does provide evidence of legislative intent.

Another set of sources issuing from the Governor's office which may provide direct or indirect evidence of the intent of legislation are Governor's press releases from around the date of the signing of the bill by the Governor. These are available at the State Library, dating from 1958.  Recent releases appear on the the government website .

Other materials

Other less formal means of gleaning information relevant to legislative intent include contacting the original petitioners for the bill, whether sponsoring legislators or members of special organizations. The names of the original petitioners appear on the original petition in the legislative package. Also, do not forget to examine newspapers for clues about the social conditions out of which the idea for the legislation sprang.

State House News Service

Other places for legislative history research

• Massachusetts Archives 218 Morrissey Blvd, Boston MA 02125; 617-727-2816 Email: [email protected]

House and Senate Journals

• Journal of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Law School KFM2418 .H6 [Current 10 years in stacks; earlier in at Harvard Depository]
• House Journal (Massachusetts Legislature website) back to 182nd session (2001/2002)
• Journal of the Senate Law School KFM2418 .S4 [Current 10 years in stacks; earlier at Harvard Depository]
• Senate Journal (Massachusetts Legislature website) back to March 12, 1998
• Journal of the Senate (Google Books) 1868-1920
• Massachusetts Archives Journals 1780-2015/26 with gaps
• Secretary of State, House of the Journal of Representatives Back to 1715 with gaps

Legislative committees

• Committee Hearings Schedule

Governnor Material

• Legislation as Filed current administration

Administrative Law

Research guides.

• Guide to Massachusetts Administrative Law (Suffolk University Law School Library)
• 950 CMR 20.00: Preparing and Filing Regulations
• Regulations Manual (2008)(Secretary of the Commonwealth) "intended to assist agency personnel in the entire process of drafting, proposing and filing regulations that are procedurally correct and easy to understand"
• Researching the Code of Massachusetts Regulations (Massachusetts State Library)
• Massachusetts Register

Final regulations published in the Massachusetts Register are removed and interfiled into our Code of Massachusetts Regulations.

The Massachusetts Register includes:

• new and amended regulations (including emergency regulations)
• notices of hearings and comment periods for proposed regulations and amendments,
• a cumulative table of changes to regulations published during the current calendar year,
• a list of Acts and Resolves passed by the General Court,
• executive orders,
• Attorney General opinions, and
• notices of public interest (e.g., additions to the State Register of Historic Places).
• Massachusetts Register (MA State Library) pdf's

Code of Massachusetts Regulations

Note that the Code of Massachusetts Regulations did not start until 1976. 

There is no official subject index to the CMR published by the Secretary of State, but there are Weil's Index to the Code of Massachusetts Regulations and the Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries' index .  

Regulations in the CMR may be updated by "emergency regulations" published in the Massachusetts Register. 

• Code of Massachusetts Regulations (print) The official publication of codified Massachusetts regulations. KFM2435 1987 .A21 for current edition Previous editions of the code are kept in microfiche. Mic KFM2435 1987 .A213a (Drawer 1044) [Table of contents binder in Mic Ref.] 1987-2011. Also available in LLMC Digital.
• Code of Massachusetts Regulations (LLMC Digital) Back to 1987 in pdf
• Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries Linked to the regulations on the web where available.
• Code of Massachusetts regulations. Harvard Depository KFM2435 1978 .A213 [Boston] : Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth, [1978-1986?]
• Massachusetts Code of Regulations Mic KFM2435 1976 .A22x (Drawer 1044) [Boston : Office of the Secretary of State, 1976]

Regulation tracking

• MA State Net Regulatory Text From 2000 through current

Massachusetts Agencies

• Mass.gov List of Agencies Websites
• Organization chart

Administrative Decisions-General

Some agencies post their decisions on their websites, but usually only back to 2000's .

• Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries includes links to opinions on agency websites

Attorney General Opinions

• Annual Report of the Attorney General Opinions are included.
• Attorney General Opinions (Mass.gov)
• Massachusetts Attorney General Reports and Opinions back to 1977
• Massachusetts Attorney General Opinions 1891-1976

Executive Orders

• Executive Orders (Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries)
• Executive Orders (Mass.gov) includes very recent orders
• Guide to Administrative Law Research (Suffolk University Law School)

Collections of Administrative Opinions/Decisions-Generally

Some agencies post their decisions on their websites, but usually selectively and only back to the 2000's.

DEP/Environmental

• Environmental Decisions "Recommended (non-final) decisions [by the Division of Administrative Law Appeals] on appeals of Department of Environmental Protection permit and enforcement actions."

MCAD/discrimination

• Massachusetts Discrimination Law Reporter Law School KFM 2811.A6 M37x (1979-current)
• MCAD decisions back to 2002

Bureau of Special Education Appeals-Education

• Massachusetts Special Education Reporter KFM2795.9.H3 M37 print back to 1995
• BSEA Decisions and Rulings back to 1998 note: separate sections of website

Massachusetts State Finance Commission Decisions

Division of administrative law appeals, dlr (lrc)/labor.

• Massachusetts Labor Cases Began with issue for July 1974.
• Decisions (Massachusetts Labor Relations Commission) Case no. CAS-1-2044; Feb. 13, 1970-1974; SUP 20-49; Aug. 1972-1974, incomplete.

Housing Appeals Committee

• Massachusetts Housing Appeals Committee back to September 13, 1971

Workers Compensation

Department of industrial accidents, massachusetts appellate tax board.

• Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board reporter beginning Oct. 1, 1981
• Unpublished decisions/orders
• Tax Appeal Decisions back to findings promulgated during year 2000

Commonly Sought Towns/Cities

• Boston Code of Ordinances See City Clerk's Office for additional resources related to local lawmaking.
• Boston Zoning Code
• Cambridge Code of Ordinances See City Clerk's Office for additional resources related to local lawmaking.
• Cambridge Zoning Ordinance

Historical Codes/Bylaws and Charters

Selected historical codes from Massachusetts cities/towns may be found in the following projects:

• Making of Modern Law: Primary Sources, 1620-1926 more... less... Comprising 1,360 titles--and almost two million fully searchable pages—drawn chiefly from the Lillian Goldman Law Library at Yale University, Making of Modern Law: Primary Sources, 1620-1926 contains digital images of cases, statutes and regulations that have shaped American legal history. The digital archive includes early state codes (compilations of laws arranged alphabetically by subject); city charters (enacted and proposed charters and ordinances in American municipal jurisdictions); law dictionaries (important for investigating the history of legal concepts or interpreting the meaning of older documents); digests (indexes to reported cases, arranged by subject); and the published records of the American colonies (more than sixty titles of records and documents that have been transcribed, edited, printed, and indexed by six generations of scholars). The database provides for simple and advance searching, and for browsing by author and title.
• Internet Archives E-books and Texts Archive

Additional Web resources

• Attorney General, Municipal Law Unit

Other Current municipal codes online

• Massachusetts City and Town Bylaws and Ordinances (Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries)
• Handbook of Massachusetts land use and planning law : zoning, subdivision control, and nonzoning alternatives Law School KFM2858 .B62 2011

Sources for court rules and standing orders

• Massachusetts Rules of Court (Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries)
• Annotated Laws of Massachusetts selected court rules appear with the annotated statutes
• Massachusetts Court Rules as E-Books The Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries offers the following rules in e-book form: Mass. Rules of Civil Procedure (09/01/17) includes Reporter's Notes Mass. Rules of Criminal Procedure (03/01/17) includes Reporter's Notes Mass. Rules of Appellate Procedure (05/01/13) includes Reporter's Notes Mass. Rules of Domestic Relations Procedure (03/07/12) Mass. Juvenile Court Rules and Standing Orders (04/23/12) Mass. Land Court Rules: Includes Rules, Standing Orders, the Manual of Instructions and the Guidelines on Registered Land. (01/01/17) Mass. Superior Court Rules (01/01/18) Mass. Guide to Evidence (2017)
• Massachusetts Rules of Court
• Massachusetts practice series : rules practice also in print at KFM2480 .M3 v.6- 2006
• Massachusetts General Laws Annotated selected court rules appear with the annotated statutes
• Court Rules (SJC website) contains Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules of Criminal Procedure and Rules of the Supreme Judicial Court

Commentary, Annotated Versions and Expanding on Research

• Annotated Laws of Massachusetts selected court rules appear with annotated statutes
• Shepards Massachusetts Citations (print) KFM2459 .S53

Secondary Sources and resources by topic

Massachusetts practice series (west).

One of this most popular secondary sources in Massachusetts, Massachusetts Practice Series is an encyclopedic series of treatises on a variety of subjects.  It is available in print in the library or on Westlaw.

Other basic works

Massachusetts continuing legal education materials.

Massachusetts Contintuing Legal Education (MCLE) is a nonprofit that offers continuing legal education/training to lawyers.  They also offer several publications from looseleafs to seminar texts, deskbooks and compendia.  A selection of them is available through our Lexis, Westlaw and Bloomberg Law, as well as MCLE Onlinepass   subscriptions.  We also have some in print in the library (search Hollis). 

Harvard Law Affiliates may also access online continuing education program webcasts via MCLE Onlinepas s .

• MCLE OnlinePassTM

One of the most popular secondary sources in Massachusetts, Massachusetts Practice Series is an encyclopedic series of treatises on a variety of subjects.  It is available in print in the library or on Westlaw .

Massachusetts Contintuing Legal Education (MCLE) is a nonprofit that offers continuing legal education/training to lawyers.  They also offer several publications from looseleafs to seminar texts, deskbooks and compendia.  A selection of them is available through MCLE One Pass which also has  media of the continuing legal education programming.  (Access is controlled by HLS IP address and is limited to the Harvard Law School community. Off-campus access is controlled by HLS Account username and password.), as well as our Lexis, Westlaw and Bloomberg Law subscriptions.  Through the law school link, you can also register for a personal account to receive updates.  We also have some MCLE materials in print in the library (search Hollis+ ).

The organization offers discounts on live program fees for newly admitted attorneys, pending admitees and law students.  See its program calendar .   We also have free MP's/broadcasts of its programming through MCLE One Pass.

Guides on the Internet

• Law About Guides...(Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries)
• Practice Areas Library (Massachusetts Legal Services)

Juvenile Law

Child welfare.

• Child Support Enforcement Division
• Boston CASA
• Mass Legal Help-Children and Families
• Harvard Law School Child Advocacy Program
• MassLegal Services - Child Welfare

Treatises and encyclopedias listed below might also contain forms.  A search in Hollis for Massachusetts and forms in the subject will yield additional resources.

• Forms (Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries)

Miscellaneous

• Massachusetts Law about Civil Procedure (Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries)

Treatises and Encyclopedias

• Massachusetts Deposition Practice Manual Also on Lexis, Westlaw, Bloomberg Law and MCLE OnlinePassTM
• Massachusetts Civil Procedure Treatises (Lexis)

Jury instructions

Secretary of state-corporations division.

• Secretary of State, Corporations Division
• Search the Corporate Database
• Search Corporate Rejected Filings
• Search Names Database
• Search Trademarks
• File Online
• Filing Information by Subject
• Massachusetts Corporation Law and Practice

Deskbooks/Compendia

Sentencing, parole and probation.

• Massachusetts Sentencing Commission
• Massachusetts Sentencing Guidelines

Treatises and Seminar Texts

• Massachusetts Criminal Law Treatises (Lexis)
• Criminal Model Jury Instructions on state court website

Other websites

• Committee for Public Counsel Services
• Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI)
• Department of Correction

Massachusetts Guide to Evidence

• Massachusetts Guide to Evidence (2021) from section 102: "The sections contained in this Guide summarize the law of evidence applied in proceedings in the courts of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as set forth in the Massachusetts General Laws, common law, and rules of court, and as required by the Constitutions of the United States and Massachusetts. The provisions contained in this Guide may be cited by lawyers, parties, and judges, but are not to be construed as adopted rules of evidence or as changing the existing law of evidence."
• Handbook on Massachusetts Evidence (Cheetah)(Harvard login) Current and previous editions also available in print. Check Hollis. Had been known as "Liacos on Evidence."
• Annotated Guide to Massachusetts Evidence (Westlaw)
• A practical guide to introducing evidence : basic foundations and objections Call Number: KFM2938 .P684x ISBN: 1575894440 Also on Lexis, Westlaw, Bloomberg and MCLE OnlinePassTM

Child Support

• Child Support Enforcement (Department of Revenue)
• Guidelines and Worksheets

Domestic Violence

• Guidelines and Forms

Treatises and other commentary

• Massachusetts Family Law Journal includes selected cases from Massachusetts Probate and Family Courts of various counties; also available through HLSL Lexis E-book Library
• Massachusetts Family Law Treatises (Lexis)
• Massachusetts Probate and Family Court Department
• Labor and Employment Law treatises (Lexis)
• State Building Code
• Social Law Library databases contains 6th-9th editions of MA Building Code

Advocacy groups that deal with landlord/tenant issues

• MassLegalHelp

Books and Serial Titles

• Legal tactics : finding public and subsidized housing Also available at MassLegalHelp
• Legal tactics : tenants' rights in Massachusetts : private housing Chapters are also available at MassLegalHelp .
• Handbook of Massachusetts land use and planning law : zoning, subdivision control, and nonzoning alternatives / Law School KFM2858 .B62 2011
• Massachusetts Real Property Treatises (Lexis)

Registries of Deeds

• Massachusetts Land Records links to county registries of deeds

Assessors Offices

• Massachusetts Assessor and Property Tax Records Directory
• Land Court - Trial Orders (Lexis)
• Find a Land Court case docket (mass.gov)
• Land Court Search (Social Law Library Databases)(Harvard Law login)
• Land Court Reporter [print]
• Housing Court (Social Law Library Databases)(Harvard Law login)

Sources for the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct

Massachusetts adopted the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct in 1997.   Court rules are promulgated in the Mass. Reports. (Mass.)

• Supreme Judicial Court Rule 3:07 Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct (Board of Bar Overseers/Office of Bar Counsel) Recent edition.
• Massachusetts SJC Rule 3:07 Professional Rules of Conduct (SJC)

Ethics decisions

• Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers, Office of Bar Counsel
• Disciplinary Decisions
• BBO Disciplinary Decisions (MCLE Online)
• Massachusetts Attorney Discipline Reports KFM2476.5.A2 A495x back to 1974
• Boston Bar Association Ethics Opinions back to 1992

Important entities

• Board of Bar Overseers/Office of the Bar Counsel
• Massachusetts Law about Lawyers (Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries)

Free on the web

• Massachusetts Legal Forms (by subject) Compiled by the Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries.
• State Forms
• Self-Help Center (Massachusetts Court System)
• Forms (Massachusetts Court System)

In our collection/subscriptions

For additional books in our collection that contain forms, search for Massachusetts and forms in the subject fields with your search in Hollis  and look at treatises on Lexis, Westlaw, Bloomberg Law and MCLE OnlinePassTM.  

• Secondary Sources by Topic

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly is the leading legal newspaper for Massachusetts and is well known for its coverage of the business and practice of law in Massachusetts. Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly covers a wide range of topics of interest to the Massachusetts legal community including political and judicial developments, legislative activities, administrative actions, verdicts & settlements, and notable opinions, as well as attorney, firm and judicial profiles and legal commentary.

• Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly Access is available on the Harvard Law School campus. Off-campus access is available to current HLS affiliates and controlled by Harvard Key. Additional content and services may be controlled by username and password, available from the Reference Desk.
• Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly (Lexis)(2004-present)
• Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly (print and micro)

Other Massachusetts multisource news databases

• Google News
• Factiva more... less... Factiva is a database of over 8,000 business and news publications, most in full text. Sources are in 22 languages, date back as far as 1969, and include trade journals, newswires (Dow Jones, Reuters, and others), media programs, and company and stock reports. Find information on over 22,000 public and private companies including description, history, current stock quote, financial data, competitors, and the latest news on business activities. Search publications by title, industry, geographic locations, type, and language.
• Access World News (Massachusetts)(Harvard Law login)
• Masstrac News/Media (Harvard Law login) available on campus
• Chronicling America, U.S. Newspaper Directory bibliographic information only

Individual publications

• Boston Globe
• Boston Herald

Historical newspapers

• America's Historical Newsapers several Massachusetts newspapers from the late 1700 through 1800's (and some in early 1900's)
• Boston Globe Historical
• Boston Herald, May 01, 1848-December 31, 1922
• Newspaper Archive
• Zimmer Index and Digitization Project An Index to Late 19th/Early 20th Massachusetts Newspaper Articles
• Cambridge Public Library Historic Newspaper Collection
• Google News Archive
• Widener Collection of Newspapers on Microfilm Search Limit by state to Massachusetts.

Law360 Massachusetts

• Law360 Massachusetts [Harvard Law login]

Legal journals

• Boston Bar Journal published by the Boston Bar Association; also on HeinOnline
• Massachusetts Law Review published by the Massachusetts Bar Association; formerly Massachusetts Law Quarterly; also on HeinOnline

Other media

• Boston TV News Digital Archive
• 61FRESH: Latest Boston news
• WGBH Open Vault

Finding Attorneys in Massachusetts

• Board of Bar Overseers-Attorney Database
• Masaschusetts Lawyers Diary
• Bench and Bar of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (1895) also on Google Books
• Justia Lawyer Directory
• JustiServ New startup founded by Harvard student and Northeastern Law professor that allows users to compare rates for case types. See http://www.justiserv.com/lawyers/criteria/terms for directory inclusion. Lawyers are charged, but use by clients is free.

State Judges

• American Bench
• Leadership Online (Harvard login)
• Massachusetts Political Almanac
• Court Listener (Judges) add Massachusetts to Advanced Search
• Ballotpedia

Other state officials

• Massachusetts Political Almanac [print]

Other biographical sources

• Marquis Who's Who on the Web (Harvard login) Includes items referenced in Who's Who in American Law
• Who's Who in American Law

Massachusetts Legal History

Basic sources.

• Sources of Massachusetts Legal History See guide and Hollis record for inventory.
• Prestatehood Legal Materials HeinOnline (Harvard login)
• State Library's Dspace Digital Repository
• Archive of Americana more... less... Full-text collection of source material documenting the history and culture of the United States. Parts available to Harvard users are: Early American Imprints, Series I and II; America’s Historical Newspapers (Early American Newspapers, Series I, II, III); American State Papers, 1789-1838; U.S. Congressional Serial Set, 1817-1980; and American Broadsides and Ephemera.
• HeinOnline more... less... http://heinonline.org.ezp1.harvard.edu/HOL/Help?topic=lucenesyntax
• LLMC Digital more... less... http://www.llmc.com/content_status_table.htm
• Online Books Page
• Massachusetts State Library catalog
• Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts
• Family Search Family Search has a variety of old Massachusetts including some court records/indexes. (Note: The library does not have a subscription.)
• Massachusetts Secretary of State Collection Guides
• Ancestry Library Edition Access via HarvardKey. more... less... Extensive collection of vital records, directories, censuses, military records, and other material from the United States and Canada, intended for genealogical research. Includes fully-indexed, full-text images of United States federal census returns, 1790-1940.

Archives Databases and Online Indexes

• Massachusetts Archives Collection Database includes colonial, provincial, and Revolutionary records See volumes descriptions .
• Index to Vital Records (1841-1910)
• Massachusetts State Library Digital Collections
• Commonwealth Digital Library

Useful research guides

• A Research Guide to the Massachusetts Courts and Their Records Reference KFM2478 .M46 1987 Special Coll Ref KFM2478 .M46x 1987 [c. 3] Special Coll Ref KFM2478 .M46 1987 [c. 2]
• Law in Colonial Massachusetts, 1630-1800

Colonial times

• Records of the Governor and Company of the Massachusetts Bay in New England
• Bibliographical Sketch of the Laws of the Massachusetts Colony from 1630 to 1686
• The book of the general lauues and libertyes concerning the inhabitants of the Massachusets collected out of the records of the General Court for the several years wherin they were made and established, and now revised by the same Court and disposed into
• Law of Colonial Massachusetts, 1630-1800 Guide to publications
• Common Law in Colonial America

Constitutional history

• Massachusetts State Constitution part of the series The Oxford commentaries on the state constitutions of the United States (formerly Reference Guides to State Constitutions)
• A manual for the Constitutional convention, 1917 submitted to the Constitutional convention by the Commission to compile information and data for the use of the Constitutional convention
• Debates in the Massachusetts Constitutional Convention, 1917-1918. Law School Mic KF4530 .S74 [Ma 24] (Drawer 867), LLMC Digital and Google Books

Websites for libraries, archives and other organizations

• Massachusetts Archives
• Colonial Society of Massachusetts
• City of Boston Archives
• Massachusetts Historical Society
• Supreme Judicial Court Historical Society Social Law Library
• Massachusetts State Library

Genealogical sources

• Ancestry.com (Harvard login) Census, virtal statistics and immigration and naturalizations lsits.
• Massachusetts, U.S. Genealogy Research (Family Search)

Selected titles

• Sketches of the Judicial History of Massachusetts from 1630 to the Revolution in 1775
• Massachusetts records; a handbook for genealogists, historians, lawyers, and other researchers Call Number: Harvard Depository Publication Date: 1957

MCLE Legal Heritage Series

• Breaking barriers : the unfinished story of women lawyers and judges in Massachusetts Contributors include Martha Minow
• Legal chowder : lawyering and judging in Massachusetts
• Rough justice to due process : the district courts of Massachusetts, 1869-2004

Sources for old cases and court records

• Accessing Court Archives (Mass.gov) See Learn about the court archives
• Sources for Early American Legal History (Finding Cases)
• A Research Guide to the Massachusetts Courts and Their Records
• Criminal trials in the Court of Assistants and Superiour Court of Judicature, 1630-1700 / by John Noble
• World Trials Library (HeinOnline)
• Massachusetts Supreme Court Reports (LLMC)
• Catalogue of records and files in the office of the clerk of the Supreme Judicial Court for the county of Suffolk. (rev. 1896)
• Abstract and index of the records of the Inferiour court of pleas (Suffolk county court) held at Boston, 1680-1698
• Massachusetts records; a handbook for genealogists, historians, lawyers, and other researchers Identifying sources for court records
• Records of the Suffolk county court, 1671-1680.
• Massachusetts Superior Court Files, 1859-1959 data
• Records of the Court of Assistants of the Colony of the Massachusetts Bay, 1630-1692
• The Records of the MASSACHUSETTS SUPERIOR COURT and Its Predecessors An Inventory and Guide
• Quincy's Reports
• The files of the Massachusetts Superior Court, 1859-1959 : an analysis and a plan for action : a report of the Massachusetts Judicial Records Committee of the Supreme Judicial Court, Boston, 1979 Includes the author's 1977 inventory published under title: The records of the Massachusetts Superior Court and its predecessors.

Antislavery Petitions Massachusetts

• Antislavery Petitions Massachusetts Dataverse
• Launch of the Digital Archive of Massachusetts Anti-Slavery and Anti-Segregation Petitions
• Commonwealth Historical Collaborative
• Massachusetts Historical Society Catalog
• Massachusetts State Library Catalog

Digital projects/gateways

• Massachusetts State Library DSpace Repository
• Digital Commonwealth
• Colonial America (Harvard login)
• Colonial State Papers
• Massachusetts Historical Society Online Resources
• Massachusetts State Archives collection, colonial period, 1622-1788 (Family Search) Note: Library does not have a subscription
• Massachusetts Archives Digital Repository See also Digital Repository Search Guide
• Family Search Massachusetts materials Note: Library does not have subscription

SJC Style Manual

• SJC Style Manual "This style manual is used by the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC), their law clerks, and the staff of the office of the Reporter of Decisions. The manual may be useful to those preparing appellate briefs and it may offer readers of the official reports a better understanding of the process of reporting the court's opinions."

Governor's Budget

• Governor's Budget Includes great agency information with organizational chart and related statutes, regulations and reports.

Local law libraries with strong knowledge and collections in MA law

• Social Law Library
• Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries
• Suffolk University Law School Library
• New England Law Boston Library

Other guides to Massachusetts legal research

• Massachusetts Law Research Guide (BU Law Library)
• Massachusetts Legal Research (Boston College Law Library)
• Suffolk Law Library Guides Arranged by subject-look for Massachusetts
• Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries Law About
• Massachusetts Resources (New England Law Boston)
• Researching Massachusetts Law (Western New England School of Law)

Vital Records and Public Records/FOI

• Guide to Public Records in Massachusetts (Secretary of State)
• Public Records Requests (mass.gov)
• Public Records Division (Secretary of State)
• Open Meeting Law (Attorney General)
• Muckrock Public records requests (and materials) posted.
• Massachusetts law about freedom of information and public records (Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries)
• Manual for the General Court Previous editions at http://archives.lib.state.ma.us/handle/2452/39848

Professional and Continuing Education Organizations

• Boston Bar Association
• Massachusetts Bar Association
• Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education

State Documents

• Official Publications of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts On microfilm Drawers 357-360. Look up document number in Massachusetts state publications. Checklist. , Massachusetts State Publications and Massachusetts executive department publications .
• Massachusetts State Publications digitized (on Internet Archive) 1978-1980 1987-1989 1981-1983 1984-1986 1987-1989 1990-1992 1993-1995 1996-1998 1999-2000
• Massachusetts Executive Department Publications digitized on Internet Archive 1969-1971 1972-1974 1975-1977
• State Library of Massachusetts DSpace
• Internet Archive Texts
• UMass Amherst on Internet Archive
• State Library of Massachusetts on Internet Archive
• Massachusetts Land Records
• Find Legal Aid (civil) Directory provided by Massachusetts Legal Services (online resource for Massachusetts Poverty Law advocates)
• Harvard Legal Aid Bureau

State-level

• Election Statistics
• Court Data, Metrics and Reports
• Analyze Boston

Contact Us!

  Ask Us!  Submit a question or search our knowledge base.

Chat with us!  Chat   with a librarian (HLS only)

Email: [email protected]

 Contact Historical & Special Collections at [email protected]

  Meet with Us   Schedule an online consult with a Librarian

Hours  Library Hours

Classes  View  Training Calendar  or  Request an Insta-Class

 Text  Ask a Librarian, 617-702-2728

 Call  Reference & Research Services, 617-495-4516

• Last Updated: May 22, 2023 2:12 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.harvard.edu/law/massachusetts

Harvard University Digital Accessibility Policy

Massachusetts Case Law Search

Uncover the most relevant Massachusetts case law with Lexis+ ® — the superior legal research solution for Massachusetts attorneys

Massachusetts Case Law Library and Database

Wherever in the U.S. you practice, you’re only as good as the legal content you depend on. And if you’re not using LexisNexis ® , you could be missing critical Massachusetts primary and secondary law content only we have. Leading attorneys use Lexis+ because it offers the most accurate information across a variety of practice areas to help attorneys keep up in a constantly changing legal environment.

Here’s exactly how LexisNexis beats Westlaw in Massachusetts

Overall Massachusetts Case Law Coverage: LexisNexis beats Westlaw by 6%

Massachusetts Trial Court Orders: LexisNexis beats Westlaw by 53%

Massachusetts Verdicts & Settlements: LexisNexis beats Westlaw by 81%

Use the exclusive, AI-powered features within Lexis+ to assist with an array of legal matters—from breaking down complex case law to pinpointing regulations and statutes. The easy-to-use platform and one-of-a-kind case search experience solidifies Lexis+ as the legal research solution many practitioners turn to for comprehensive Massachusetts case searches.

Solo & Duo Firms: Get exclusive, customized Massachusetts content tailored for your practice and budget.

Further your expertise.

LexisNexis has a vast analytical library from Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) covering multiple practice areas and topics, including:

• Labor & Employment
• Civil Procedure
• Criminal Law
• Corporate Law
• Estate, Gift and Trust Law

LexisNexis also offers the following jury instruction sources from MCLE:

• Criminal Model Jury Instructions for Use in the District Court
• Massachusetts Superior Court Civil Practice Jury Instructions
• Massachusetts Superior Court Criminal Practice Jury Instructions

Conduct Your Next Massachusetts Case Search with Lexis+

To bolster your argument, accelerate your legal research, and gain a deeper understanding of Massachusetts state law, access the vast collection of Massachusetts case law with the LexisNexis service.

Lexis+ helps you expedite legal drafting in accordance with Massachusetts law, so you can concentrate on substantive, higher-value client work. Discover a repository of state-specific forms and templates to springboard drafting, helping you identify Massachusetts state law that is similar to your matter at hand that may require specific forms or filings during litigation.

Try Lexis+ exclusive Massachusetts content

Start your complimentary 7-day trial today.

COMMONWEALTH vs. ROGELIO R. BUCKLEY

478 mass. 861, october 5, 2017 - february 14, 2018, court below: superior court, plymouth county, present: gants, c.j., lenk, gaziano, lowy, budd, cypher, & kafker, jj..

Records And Briefs:

• (1) SJC-12344 01 Appellant Buckley Brief
• (2) SJC-12344 03 Appellant Buckley Reply Brief
• (3) SJC-12344 04 Appellee Commonwealth Brief
• (4) SJC-12344 05 Amicus Lawyers Committee Brief
• (5) SJC-12344 06 Amicus Committee For Public Counsel Services Brief
• (6) SJC-12344 09 Amicus ACLU Of Massachusetts Brief
• (7) SJC-12344 11 Amicus Suffolk DA Office Brief

Controlled Substances. Constitutional Law, Search and seizure, Reasonable suspicion, Investigatory stop. Search and Seizure, Threshold police inquiry, Reasonable suspicion, Consent, Motor vehicle. Threshold Police Inquiry. Practice, Criminal, Motion to suppress.

This court declined to disturb its general rule that the reasonableness of a traffic stop under art. 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights is evaluated according to the authorization test articulated in Commonwealth v. Santana, 420 Mass. 205 (1995), and reiterated that legal justification alone, such as an observed traffic violation, is sufficient. [864-873] Budd, J., concurring.

A Superior Court judge properly denied the criminal defendant's pretrial motion to suppress evidence seized after a traffic stop, where the police officer was warranted in conducting the stop of the vehicle in which the defendant was a passenger, in that, before conducting the stop, the officer observed the vehicle traveling above the speed limit [873]; further, two plainclothes detectives who joined the officer at the scene did not impermissibly expand the scope of the stop in asking the driver about the odor of marijuana emanating from the vehicle, where nothing in the record indicated that the tasks tied to the traffic infraction were already complete when the detectives arrived, and where the detective who inquired had authority to issue a civil citation based on the odor [873-875]; finally, the judge did not err in finding that the driver freely and voluntarily consented to the search of the vehicle [875][876].

INDICTMENTS found and returned in the Superior Court Department on April 19, 2013.

A pretrial motion to suppress evidence was heard by Cornelius J. Moriarty, II, J., and the cases were tried before Richard J. Chin, J.

The Supreme Judicial Court granted an application for direct appellate review.

Matthew Malm for the defendant.

Mary E. Lee, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.

The following submitted briefs for amici curiae:

Ivan Espinoza-Madrigal, of New York, Oren M. Sellstrom, &

Oren N. Nimni for Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Economic Justice & others.

Rebecca Kiley, Committee for Public Counsel Services, & Derege B. Demissie for Committee for Public Counsel Services & another.

Jeff Goldman, Vanessa M. Brown, Matthew R. Segal, Rahsaan D. Hall, Jessie J. Rossman, & Carlton E. Williams for American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts.

Daniel F. Conley, District Attorney, & John P. Zanini, Cailin M. Campbell, & David D. McGowan, Assistant District Attorneys, for District Attorney for the Suffolk District.

CYPHER, J. In this appeal we are asked to reconsider one tenet of our search and seizure jurisprudence: that a traffic stop constitutes a "reasonable" "seizure" for purposes of art. 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights where a police officer has observed a traffic violation, notwithstanding the officer's underlying motive for conducting the stop. See Commonwealth v. Santana, 420 Mass. 205 (1995). For the sound legal and practical reasons discussed below, we decline to depart from that tenet as the general standard governing the validity of traffic stops under art. 14. We affirm the denial of the defendant's motion to suppress, and we also affirm the judgment of conviction.

Facts. We recount the facts found by the motion judge, supplemented by uncontroverted testimony at the motion hearing. Commonwealth v. Cordero, 477 Mass. 237 , 238 (2017). On January 25, 2013, Whitman police Detectives Joseph Bombardier and Eric Campbell were conducting surveillance of a three-unit apartment building out of which they suspected drug activity was being conducted. [Note 1] At approximately 10:50 p.m. that evening, the detectives observed a vehicle park nearby, and its two occupants enter the building. Those same two individuals reemerged a few minutes later, returned to the vehicle, and drove away without the vehicle's headlights on. Bombardier instructed fellow Officer Gary Nelson to stop the vehicle for suspected drug activity. Nelson did so a few minutes later, upon observing the vehicle

traveling above the speed limit along a road in Whitman. [Note 2] Nelson radioed Bombardier that he had stopped the vehicle.

When the detectives arrived, Nelson was standing at the vehicle's driver's side. Bombardier likewise approached the driver, and in doing so he noticed a strong odor of marijuana emanating from inside the vehicle. Bombardier asked the driver if she had any marijuana in the vehicle. [Note 3] She told him that she did not think so, and said that he could check. After instructing the driver to step out, Bombardier used his flashlight to search the interior of the driver's seat area. Finding nothing, he directed Campbell to ask the front seat passenger, the defendant, to leave the vehicle. When the defendant stepped out, Campbell observed what he believed to be a firearm under the front passenger seat. [Note 4] The officers arrested the defendant and the driver, placed them in separate cruisers, and advised them of the Miranda rights. Another officer later observed a plastic bag on the floor of the cruiser between the defendant's feet that appeared to contain "crack" cocaine. The defendant was subsequently indicted for possession with the intent to distribute cocaine, as well as with firearm offenses and other offenses with enhanced penalties.

Prior to trial, the defendant moved to suppress the evidence seized during the traffic stop. The motion judge held an evidentiary hearing, and thereafter, he denied the defendant's motion. In April, 2015, a jury convicted the defendant on the lesser included offense of cocaine possession, and he was sentenced to one year in jail. The defendant timely filed this appeal from the judgment of conviction, and on appeal, he challenges only the denial of his pretrial motion to suppress.

Discussion. [Note 5] The defendant challenges the denial of his motion to suppress on three grounds. First, he argues that the evidence

against him should be suppressed as the product of a pretextual stop, where the Whitman officers stopped the vehicle the defendant occupied not because it was speeding, but because the police suspected that its occupants were involved in drug activity. The defendant contends that all such pretextual stops, which generally are legitimated on the basis of an observed civil traffic violation yet motivated by a desire to investigate suspected criminal wrongdoing as to which the police lack reasonable suspicion or probable cause to justify an investigatory stop, violate art. 14 and its protection against unreasonable seizures. [Note 6] On this point, the defendant asks that we overturn our decision in Santana, 420 Mass. 205 , which holds that an observed traffic violation is itself a lawful basis for the police to conduct a traffic stop regardless of the officer's underlying motive.

Second, the defendant argues that the police impermissibly expanded the scope of the stop when detectives Bombardier and Campbell approached the vehicle during Nelson's traffic inquiry and asked the driver about the smell of marijuana. Last, the defendant challenges the motion judge's finding that the driver's consent to the search of the vehicle was freely and voluntarily given.

We review these arguments in turn. In doing so, "we adopt the motion judge's subsidiary findings of fact absent clear error, but we independently determine the correctness of the judge's application of constitutional principles to the facts as found." Commonwealth v. Catanzaro, 441 Mass. 46 , 50 (2004).

1. Pretext. The parties dispute, as a threshold matter, whether the defendant adequately raised this issue before the motion judge. We conclude that he did. The first section of the defendant's memorandum of law in support of his motion to suppress

asserted that "[t]he car stop was effectuated so that the occupants could be identified and the car searched." The motion judge's written opinion likewise acknowledged "[t]he defendant['s] argu[ment] that the stop for the traffic offense was a pretext." The fact that the defendant did not specifically state that he challenged the continued viability of Santana does not preclude our review of this issue, given both its treatment below and the fact that the motion judge was bound to apply Santana regardless of the defendant's position. See generally Commonwealth v. Vasquez, 456 Mass. 350 , 357-358 (2010). [Note 7]

Article 14, like the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, guarantees "a right to be secure from all unreasonable searches[] and seizures." [Note 8] Because "[a] police stop of a moving automobile constitutes a seizure," Commonwealth v. Rodriguez, 472 Mass. 767 , 773 (2015), that stop must be reasonable in order to be valid under the Fourth Amendment and art. 14. A passenger in a vehicle may challenge the constitutionality of a stop. See Commonwealth v. Quintos Q., 457 Mass. 107 , 110 (2010), citing Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249, 251 (2007).

In Santana, 420 Mass. at 209, we articulated the current State constitutional standard for evaluating the validity of a traffic stop. Under that rule, called the authorization approach, a traffic stop is reasonable for art. 14 purposes "so long as the police are doing no more than they are legally permitted and objectively authorized to do," regardless of the underlying intent or motivations of the officers involved. Santana, supra, quoting United States v. Trigg, 878 F.2d 1037, 1041 (7th Cir. 1989), cert. denied sub nom. Cummins v. United States, 502 U.S. 962 (1991). [Note 9] Stated differently, under the authorization test, a stop is reasonable under art.

14 as long as there is a legal justification for it. We have long held that an observed traffic violation is one such justification. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Bacon, 381 Mass. 642 , 644 (1980) ("Where the police have observed a traffic violation, they are warranted in stopping a vehicle"); Commonwealth v. Amado, 474 Mass. 147 , 151 (2016) (valid stop where "unlit registration plate"); Commonwealth v. Feyenord, 445 Mass. 72 , 75 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1187 (2006) (valid stop where inoperable headlight in daylight); Santana, 420 Mass. at 207 (valid stop where defective taillight). Cf. Commonwealth v. Lora, 451 Mass. 425 , 436 (2008), quoting Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 810 (1996) ("the decision to stop an automobile is reasonable for Fourth Amendment purposes 'where the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred'"). As Santana makes clear, the authority to conduct a traffic stop where a traffic violation has occurred is not limited by "[t]he fact that the [police] may have believed that the [driver was] engaging in illegal drug activity." 420 Mass. at 208.

In the defendant's view, however, evaluating the reasonableness of a traffic stop on the basis of legal justification alone is not enough, because this creates the risk that the police might use an observed traffic violation as a pretext for investigating other suspected wrongdoing. [Note 10] In place of the authorization test, the defendant seeks a new art. 14 standard for traffic stops that looks beyond objective legal justification in order to examine the police's underlying motives for conducting the stop. Specifically, the defendant asks that when considering a motion to suppress a judge should examine whether a given traffic stop was only a pretext for the police's underlying "true" motive to investigate suspected criminal conduct, as to which the police lacked the requisite reasonable suspicion or probable cause to justify a bona fide investigatory stop. As the primary basis for this position, the defendant relies on a series of cases and academic articles discussing

the connections between traffic stops and racial profiling. He also argues that because Massachusetts courts have considered the issue of pretext when evaluating the reasonableness of inventory or administrative searches, so too should they consider pretext when analyzing the validity of traffic stops. Before addressing these specific points, we examine the underpinnings of Santana's authorization test.

Santana is predicated on the general constitutional principle, reflected in both art. 14 and Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, that "police conduct is to be judged 'under a standard of objective reasonableness without regard to the underlying intent or motivation of the officers involved.'" Santana, 420 Mass. at 208, quoting Commonwealth v. Ceria, 13 Mass. App. Ct. 230 , 235 (1982). [Note 11] See Lora, 451 Mass. at 436, quoting Whren, 517 U.S. at 813 ("Subjective intentions play no role in ordinary, probable cause Fourth Amendment analysis"); Ceria, supra, and cases cited. Evaluating the validity of police conduct on the basis of objective facts and circumstances, without consideration of the subjective motivations underlying that conduct, is justified in part based on the significant evidentiary difficulties such an inquiry into police motives would often entail. This would require that courts discern not only whether the police initially possessed some underlying motive that failed to align with the legal justification for their actions, but also whether the police were acting on that "improper" motive (i.e., the pretext), as opposed to the "proper" motive, when engaging in the challenged action. Both judges and legal commentators have questioned the ability of courts -- venues of limited insight -- to reach accurate and satisfactory answers to these questions, which may be more appropriately handled by psychologists or philosophers than lawyers.

See, e.g., United States v. Arra, 630 F.2d 836, 845, n.12 (1st Cir. 1980) (one "problem" with this subjective approach is "the premium it would place on dissemblance," and that "it may be little more than guesswork for a court to determine what the true motivation was"); 1 W.R. LaFave, Search and Seizure § 1.4(e) (5th ed. 2012) (there is "no reason to believe that courts can with any degree of success determine in which instances the police had an ulterior motive," and "[p]resence of an ulterior motive may show why an officer might want to depart from the usual procedure but does not show that he has done so").

The authorization test avoids this often-speculative probing of the police's "true" motives, while at the same time providing an administrable rule to be applied by both law enforcement in the field as well as reviewing courts. Like its Federal counterpart, art. 14 must often "be applied on the spur (and in the heat) of the moment, and the object in implementing its command of reasonableness is to draw standards sufficiently clear and simple to be applied with a fair prospect of surviving judicial second-guessing months and years after an arrest or search is made." Atwater v. Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318, 347 (2001). The bright-line standard of legal justification achieves this by clarifying exactly when the police may conduct a traffic stop: where an officer has observed a traffic violation. "If this were not so, [a traffic stop's] validity could not be settled until long after the event; it would depend not only on the psychology of the arresting officer but on the psychology of the judge." United States v. McCambridge, 551 F.2d 865, 870 (1st Cir. 1977). [Note 12]

Moreover, this rule also ensures that the same constitutional protections under art. 14 are afforded to all Massachusetts drivers where the same factual circumstances are present. As we observed in Santana, "the defendants' contention might yield the illogical result of allowing stops of nonsuspect drivers who violate motor vehicle laws, but forbidding stops of suspected criminals who violate motor vehicle laws." Santana, 420 Mass. at 210 n.3. Application of the exclusionary rule in these circumstances,

as the defendant requests, would be contrary to that rule's purpose, which is to "deter intentional unconstitutional behavior." Lora, 451 Mass. at 439. Its effect here would be to deter the police from carrying out one of their primary objectives: investigating, within permissible legal boundaries, suspected criminal behavior.

Beyond these legal and practical justifications, Santana's authorization test is grounded in sound policy. We have noted that "allowing police to make [traffic] stops serves [the] significant government interest" of ensuring public safety on our roadways. Rodriguez, 472 Mass. at 776. As Rodriguez more fully explains:

"[M]any of our traffic violation statutes regulate moving cars and relate directly to the promotion of public safety; even those laws that have to do with maintaining a vehicle's equipment in accordance with certain standards may also be safety-related. . . . Permitting stops based on reasonable suspicion or probable cause that these laws may have been violated gives police the ability to immediately address potential safety hazards on the road. Thus, although a vehicle stop does represent a significant intrusion into an individual's privacy, the government interest in allowing such stops for the purpose of promoting compliance with our automobile laws is clear and compelling" (citation omitted).

Id. at 776-777. Therefore, the fact that a traffic law has been violated is, generally speaking, a legally sufficient basis to justify stopping a vehicle, irrespective of any additional suspicions held by the officer(s) conducting the stop. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Cruz, 459 Mass. 459 , 465 (2011) ("officers validly 'stopped' the car for parking in front of a fire hydrant, a civil traffic violation . . . . Thus, the officers' presence at the side of the car was appropriate" [citations omitted]); Santana, 420 Mass. at 210 ("By driving an automobile with a broken taillight, the defendants took the risk of being stopped"). In that sense a traffic stop cannot be "arbitrary," because it is predicated on a driver violating a traffic law. [Note 13]

Still, the defendant urges that we overturn Santana on the ground that the authorization test countenances pretextual stops

-- and more specifically, stops motivated by the race of the driver (i.e., racial profiling). In the defendant's view, this court's previous attempt to address the problem of racial bias in traffic stops, Lora, 451 Mass. at 444-447, has failed to provide a meaningful remedy. Lora held that where a driver produces "sufficient evidence to raise a reasonable inference," id. at 442, that the stop at issue "is the product of the selective enforcement predicated on race," evidence seized in the course of that stop must be suppressed under the exclusionary rule. Id. at 440. The surest way to effectively remedy that issue now, the defendant contends, is simply to do away with Santana's authorization test, and instead hold that all pretextual stops, regardless of the particular motive (whether it be the race of a driver, or, as here, a desire to investigate suspected criminal wrongdoing) violate art. 14. There are at least two deficiencies in this argument.

First, to the extent the defendant appeals to our consideration of the motivations underlying a traffic stop in the racial profiling context as a basis for doing so in this and similar cases, he ignores any distinction between art. 14 and the equal protection principles of arts. 1 and 10 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights. In Lora we observed that racial profiling "is at base a claim that [the police] selectively enforced the laws in contravention of the Fourteenth Amendment and arts. 1 and 10." Lora, 451 Mass. at 436. We permitted inquiry into officers' subjective motives in that case because Lora, unlike Santana or Whren, "involved a challenge to [a] traffic stop[] based on equal protection grounds." Lora, supra. At the same time, we observed that "'[s]ubjective intentions play no role in ordinary, probable cause Fourth Amendment analysis.' Our holding in [Santana] is not to the contrary." Id., quoting Whren, 517 U.S. at 813. See Lora, supra, quoting Whren, supra ("the constitutional basis for objecting to intentionally discriminatory application of laws is the Equal Protection Clause, not the Fourth Amendment"). Thus, Lora makes clear that to the extent we do consider the purpose of a stop when assessing its validity, we do so pursuant to the equal protection principles of arts. 1 and 10 -- not art. 14's guarantee against unreasonable seizures -- and only where a driver has alleged that race was the reason for the stop.

This brings us to the more obvious deficiency in the defendant's appeal to the racial profiling context: the fact that racial profiling is not an issue in this case. Unlike the Lora defendant, the defendant here has raised no allegation of impermissible

discrimination, and he does not challenge the traffic stop on equal protection grounds. To the contrary, he acknowledges in his brief that he is "is not arguing (and has never argued) that he was racially profiled" [Note 14] (emphasis added). Although we certainly do not dispute, as a general matter, the enormity or relevance of the problem of racial profiling, it is not an appropriate basis for overturning our general art. 14 standard governing the reasonableness of traffic stops where the defendant has expressly disavowed any such argument that race was a factor in the stop at issue.

At the same time, the defendant and the concurring Justice raise considerable, legitimate concerns regarding racial profiling and the impact of such practices on communities of color. We share these sentiments, which echo those expressed by past members of this court. See, e.g., Lora, 451 Mass. at 444, and cases cited ("Justices of this court have expressed considerable concern about the practice of racial profiling in prior decisions"). We likewise acknowledge their valid questions regarding the lasting efficacy of Lora for addressing the issue of pretextual stops motivated by race, given that in the near-decade since that decision, we are not aware of a single reported case suppressing evidence under its framework. We take this opportunity to encourage lawyers to use the Lora framework in cases where there is reason to believe a traffic stop was the result of racial profiling. To the extent we must review the adequacy of our decision in Lora, however, or address these issues in depth, we wait to do so in a case where a driver has actually alleged and laid a proper foundation for a claim under Lora. We cannot evaluate the efficacy of the Lora framework without a record.

As an alternative basis for his request that we overturn Santana, the defendant cites cases from "other areas of criminal law" where he contends Massachusetts courts "identify pretext" -- namely, searches conducted for the purposes of inventory or administrative regulation. But the defendant's conclusion that "there is no good reason for the distinction" between the constitutional analysis in these cases versus traffic stops ignores at least one reason. Inventory and administrative searches -- as distinct from traffic stops, which involve only a temporary seizure, see Rodriguez, 472 Mass. at 773 -- are unique in that they are

conducted in the absence of probable cause or reasonable suspicion, for purely noninvestigatory reasons. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Vuthy Seng, 436 Mass. 537 , 550-555, cert. denied, 537 U.S. 942 (2002). In these contexts, the burden rests with the Commonwealth to demonstrate that the search "was conducted for some legitimate police purpose other than a search for evidence." Commonwealth v. Benoit, 382 Mass. 210 , 219 (1981), S.C., 389 Mass. 411 (1983). From the start, then, consideration of an officer's "purpose" for conducting the search is relevant to an assessment of the lawfulness of the search itself. Thus, where it appears that the "sole purpose" of that search was in fact criminal investigation, rather than inventory or administrative regulation, any evidence unlawfully seized must be suppressed. See, e.g., Benoit, supra at 219 ("The record clearly reveals that the only purpose for the entry into this suitcase . . . was to seize evidence. The search and seizure without a warrant was, therefore, illegal"); Commonwealth v. Ortiz, 88 Mass. App. Ct. 573 , 576-577 (2015) (affirming suppression of evidence found in course of inventory search where officer testimony showed that "sole purpose of impounding and searching the defendant's vehicle and its contents" was to search "for evidence of drug activity without a warrant"). [Note 15] A traffic stop poses no such question regarding the actual legal authority for the police conduct at issue, because, as mentioned, "[w]here the police have observed a traffic violation, they are warranted in stopping a vehicle." Bacon, 381 Mass. at 644. Cf. Whren, 517 U.S. at 811 (declining to import principles of cases "addressing the validity of a search conducted in the absence of probable cause" to cases involving "police conduct that is justifiable on the basis of probable cause to believe that a

violation of law has occurred").

Having considered the defendant's arguments, we decline to disturb our general rule that the reasonableness of a traffic stop under art. 14 is evaluated according to the authorization test articulated in Santana. Outside of the racial profiling context -- as this case is -- the reasonableness of a traffic stop does not depend upon the particular motivations underlying the stop. For the sound legal and practical reasons previously described, legal justification alone, such as an observed traffic violation, is sufficient.

Applying that principle here, the motion judge credited Nelson's testimony that before conducting the traffic stop at issue, Nelson observed the vehicle traveling above the speed limit. We therefore affirm the judge's conclusion that "the stop was warranted by the observed traffic violation." "The fact that the [police] may have believed that the defendants were engaging in illegal drug activity does not limit their power to make an authorized stop." Santana, 420 Mass. at 208.

2. Scope of the stop. In addition to challenging the legality of the stop itself, the defendant argues that the Whitman police exceeded the permissible scope of the stop when the plainclothes detectives joined Nelson at the scene and asked the driver about the odor of marijuana emanating from the vehicle. "In evaluating whether the police exceeded the permissible scope of a stop, the issue is one of proportion." Commonwealth v. Sinforoso, 434 Mass. 320 , 323 (2001). "The nature of the stop, i.e., for a traffic offense, defines the scope of the initial inquiry by a police officer." Commonwealth v. Bartlett, 41 Mass. App. Ct. 468 , 470 (1996). See Commonwealth v. Cordero, 477 Mass. 237 , 241 (2017) ("A routine traffic stop may not last longer than reasonably necessary to effectuate the purpose of the stop" [quotations and citation omitted]). "Where an officer conducts an uneventful threshold inquiry giving rise to no further suspicion of criminal activity, he may not prolong the detention or expand the inquiry." Feyenord, 445 Mass. at 78 n.5.

As discussed, the stop at issue was justified based on Nelson's observation of the vehicle speeding. This defines the permissible scope of the officers' inquiry. The defendant fails to cite any authority suggesting that it was impermissible for the plainclothes detectives to join Nelson at the location of the stop. The stop remained constitutional so long as the officers did not exceed its permissible scope. There is nothing in the record to indicate that

the "tasks tied to the traffic infraction . . . [were already] complete[]," Rodriguez v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1609, 1614 (2015), by the time Bombardier and Campbell arrived, or that Nelson unnecessarily prolonged the stop to await the detectives' arrival. See Cordero, 477 Mass. at 242 ("The police do not earn 'bonus time' to conduct additional investigations by an expeditious performance of the traffic-related investigation"). The motion judge found that the detectives arrived while "Nelson [was] standing at the driver's side of the vehicle." Nelson testified that, after stopping the vehicle, he explained to the driver that he had stopped her for speeding and requested her license and registration; she produced a registration certificate but was unable to produce a license. Nelson recalled that he had been speaking with the driver for "[a]pproximately a minute," and had yet to confirm her name and date of birth, see id. at 242 (tasks during routine traffic stop reasonably include "confirmation of the identity of the driver"), when Bombardier and Campbell arrived and spoke to the driver about the smell of marijuana. At that point Nelson returned to his cruiser to confirm McGovern's information. Contrast id. at 247 (continued detention of defendant unreasonable where "the investigation of the civil traffic violations" justifying stop "was complete").

We also reject the defendant's argument that Bombardier's question to the driver about the smell of marijuana fell beyond the permissible scope of the stop. That argument is foreclosed by this court's opinion in Commonwealth v. Cruz, 459 Mass. 459 (2011). Cruz was decided following the enactment of G. L. c. 94C, §§ 32L-32N, which "changed the status of the possession of one ounce or less of marijuana from a criminal to a civil offense." Id. at 464. In Cruz, an officer who had conducted a valid traffic stop detected an odor of burnt marijuana as he approached the driver's side window; we held that the officer's "asking the driver whether he had been smoking marijuana" did not constitute an impermissible expansion of the scope of the stop, "because the officers could potentially have issued the driver a civil citation pursuant to G. L. c. 40, § 21D." Id. at 466. [Note 16] The stop at issue here took place in January, 2013 -- after the Cruz decision, while possession of

marijuana remained a civil offense. [Note 17] As in Cruz, then, Bombardier did not exceed the scope of the stop when inquiring about the smell of marijuana emanating from the vehicle, given his authority to issue a civil citation. "Once in the process of making a valid stop for a traffic violation," as here, "officers are not required to 'ignore what [they] see[], smell[] or hear[].'" Cruz, 459 Mass. at 466, quoting Bartlett, 41 Mass. App. Ct. at 471.

3. Consent. The defendant argues that the evidence should be suppressed because the driver did not voluntarily consent to the search of the vehicle. See Commonwealth v. Podgurski, 386 Mass. 385 , 390-392 (1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1222 (1983) (passenger may object to validity of vehicle search). A warrantless search such as this is presumptively unreasonable under both the Fourth Amendment and art. 14 unless one of the "few specifically established and well-delineated exceptions" to the warrant requirement apply. Commonwealth v. Johnson, 461 Mass. 44 , 48 (2011), quoting Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 455 (1971). A search authorized by consent is one such exception. See Commonwealth v. Buswell, 468 Mass. 92 , 105 (2014). As with all warrantless searches, the Commonwealth bears the burden of proof that consent was "freely and voluntarily given," Commonwealth v. Krisco Corp., 421 Mass. 37 , 46 (1995), quoting Bumper v. North Carolina, 391 U.S. 543, 548-549 (1968), meaning it was "unfettered by coercion, express or implied." Commonwealth v. Harmond, 376 Mass. 557 , 561 (1978) quoting Commonwealth v. Walker, 370 Mass. 548 , 555, cert. denied, 429 U.S. 943 (1976). "Voluntariness of consent 'is a question of fact to be determined in the circumstances of each case.'" Id., quoting Commonwealth v. Aguilar, 370 Mass. 490 , 496 (1976). As a question of fact, "it should not be reversed absent clear error by the judge." Commonwealth v. Gray, 465 Mass. 330 , 343, cert. denied, 134 S. Ct. 628 (2013), citing Commonwealth v. Carr, 458 Mass. 295 , 303 (2010).

We discern no error here. The motion judge, who "was in the best position to assess the weight and credibility of the testimony given at the [suppression] hearing," Carr, supra, concluded that the driver freely and voluntarily consented to the search of the vehicle. This was based in part on the judge's finding that when

Bombardier "asked [the driver] if she had any marijuana in the car. She told him she did not think so and said that he could check." The fact that the driver affirmatively offered the search naturally supports the judge's conclusion that her consent was voluntary. See Commonwealth v. Sanna, 424 Mass. 92 , 97-99 (1997) (concluding that "the police had properly entered the defendant's home on the consent given by the father"). Further, the record lacks any evidence to suggest that the officers' conduct during the vehicle stop was at all coercive. See Commonwealth v. Cantalupo, 380 Mass. 173 , 177-178 (1980). Contrast Carr, 458 Mass. at 302-303 (consent not voluntary where armed officers "completely blocked the only exit" from premises, officer who sought permission to search "signaled his distrust of the defendants," and request to search "sounded more like an order"). Finally, that the police did not inform the driver of her right to refuse does not, as the defendant argues, invalidate her consent. "The fact that a person is not informed by the police that he has a right to refuse to consent to an entry or search is a factor to be considered on the issue of voluntariness, but is not determinative of the issue." Sanna, 424 Mass. at 97 n.10. Given the absence of record evidence to the contrary, we conclude that the motion judge did not err in finding that the driver freely and voluntarily consented to the search of the vehicle.

Conclusion. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the denial of the defendant's motion to suppress the evidence against him. We also affirm the judgment of conviction of unlawful possession of a controlled substance.

So ordered.

BUDD, J. (concurring). I join the opinion of the court because I agree that it is unworkable to strike down the authorization rule articulated in Commonwealth v. Santana, 420 Mass. 205 (1995). However, I write separately because, although -- as the court points out -- the driver here was not stopped for "driving while black," it is important to highlight how pretextual stops disproportionately affect people of color, and to explore what can be done to mitigate the harm caused by this practice.

Years of data bear out what many have long known from experience: police stop drivers of color disproportionately more often than Caucasian drivers for insignificant violations (or provide

no reason at all). In 2017, the Stanford Open Policing Project found that police stopped African-American drivers more than Caucasian drivers, controlling for population makeup, both nationally and in Massachusetts. [Note Budd-1] Stanford Open Policing, Stop Rates, 2017, https://openpolicing.stanford.edu/findings/ [https://perma.cc/F6HT-87WE]. See United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Special Report, Police Behavior During Traffic and Street Stops, 2011, at 3 (rev. October 27, 2016), https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pbtss11.pdf [https://perma.cc/2ML3-UWY9].

In effectuating traffic stops, most officers act in good faith. Even where they do, to a Caucasian driver a traffic stop may be annoying or embarrassing, but for a driver of color, such a stop can be humiliating and painful. [Note Budd-2] Commonwealth v. Feyenord, 445 Mass. 72 , 88 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1187 (2006) (Greaney, J., concurring). Further, recent tragic events have shown that the fear people of color have of being stopped by police is justified: African-Americans have been killed during routine traffic stops. [Note Budd-3]

It goes without saying that this is not a new phenomenon. Almost twenty years ago, then-Associate Justice Ireland noted statistics from multiple jurisdictions showing that African-American and sometimes Hispanic drivers were stopped more often than Caucasian drivers, even though Caucasian drivers were the majority group. Commonwealth v. Gonsalves, 429 Mass. 658 , 670 (1999) (Ireland, J., concurring).

The reasons for pretextual stops of people of color stem from explicit bias (i.e., racial profiling), unconscious bias, [Note Budd-4] or a combination of both. See Carbado, From Stopping Black People to Killing Black People: The Fourth Amendment Pathways to Police Violence, 105 Cal. L. Rev. 125, 129-130 (2017); Harris, The Stories, the Statistics, and the Law: Why "Driving While Black" Matters, 84 Minn. L. Rev. 265, 291-292 (1999); Ramirez, Hoopes, & Quinlan, Defining Racial Profiling in a Post-September 11 World, 40 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 1195, 1197-1198 (2003). See also Greenwald & Krieger, Implicit Bias: Scientific Foundations, 94 Cal. L. Rev. 945, 951 (2006); Lawrence, The Id, the Ego, and Equal Protection: Reckoning with Unconscious Racism, 39 Stan. L. Rev. 317, 343 (1987). Regardless of the cause, it is a persistent, pervasive problem that must be addressed.

The solution, however, is not clear cut. For the reasons outlined by the court, the answer is not to overrule the authorization rule articulated in Santana, 420 Mass. at 208-209. As the court has explained, inquiring into subjective police intent for traffic stops would lead to several practical difficulties, not least among them

the question of how precisely to determine intent. Ante at 865-866.

In Commonwealth v. Lora, 451 Mass. 425 (2008), the court reiterated that although "law enforcement officers enjoy considerable discretion in exercising some selectivity for purposes consistent with the public interest," that "selectivity" cannot be based on "an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion or other arbitrary classification" [Note Budd-5] (quotations and citations omitted). Id. at 436-437. The court concluded that to rebut the presumption that a stop was not undertaken as a result of an arbitrary classification, a defendant must present "credible evidence establishing a reasonable inference of impermissible discrimination." Id. at 443. The court further held that "[a]t a minimum, that evidence must establish that the racial composition of motorists stopped for motor vehicle violations varied significantly from the racial composition of the population of motorists making use of the relevant roadways, and who therefore could have encountered the officer or officers whose actions have been called into question."

Id. at 442.

Thus, the court attempted to provide a means of combatting pretextual stops based on race with statistics. We noted that a similar approach had been somewhat successful in New Jersey. Id. at 440-441, citing State v. Soto, 324 N.J. Super. 66 (1996). As it happened, traffic stop statistics also were being collected in the Commonwealth. Before Lora was decided, the Legislature had passed An Act providing for the collection of data relative to traffic stops (act), St. 2000, c. 228. Pursuant to the act, Northeastern University analyzed a year's worth of data collected on racial and gender profiling, and issued a report in 2004. Lora, 451 Mass. at 448. Despite the Legislature's focus on data collection in this act, the court acknowledged that the defendant's evidentiary burden was "daunting." Id. at 445.

In a concurring opinion, then-Justice Ireland pointed out some of the difficulties involved in collecting the necessary data, even with the act in place. Id. at 449 (Ireland, J., concurring). For example, although the act required law enforcement agencies that

had racially profiled to continue to gather statistics, it did not contain provisions requiring those agencies to report the data to anyone or to analyze the data, severely undercutting any use that data might have had. Id. (Ireland, J., concurring). Moreover, almost one-half of the targeted agencies failed to follow the reporting guidelines of the act, for example by failing to track certain factors or failing to report at all. Id. (Ireland, J., concurring).

Justice Ireland's concerns were prescient: the act required governmental data collection for only a limited amount of time, and the Legislature has not renewed the necessary funding. See St. 2000, c. 228, § 8 (assigning financial responsibility to State agencies); id. at § 10 (requiring data to be transmitted for analysis after one year). Statistics on traffic stops, thus, are now even more difficult to come by. We are not aware of any traffic stop cases in which a defendant has been able to gather and use statistics to prove that the stop violated equal protection principles; it appears that Lora has not provided the opportunity for defendants that we had hoped it would.

Concerns about bias in pretextual traffic stops are well founded, as are concerns about the practical ability of defendants to show racial bias by way of statistics as suggested by Lora. Because this is not a "driving while black" equal protection case, the issue is not squarely before us. However, it is worth noting that it has been seventeen years since the Legislature required State agencies to collect data on racial profiling. We are not aware of the data ever being used to mount a challenge under Lora, and it is now woefully outdated. The time has come for the Legislature to address the problem once more. Publicly available data would not only assist litigants, but would also inform the public about this ongoing problem.

In the meantime, our recent holding in Commonwealth v. Cordero, 477 Mass. 237 (2017), has added to our jurisprudence. There we held that a traffic stop may go no further than investigating the alleged traffic violation unless that investigation leads to information to support reasonable suspicion of a crime. Id. at 247. See Commonwealth v. Amado, 474 Mass. 147 , 151 (2016); Gonsalves, 429 Mass. at 663; Commonwealth v. Torres, 424 Mass. 153 , 158-159 (1997). These cases are by no means a cure for racial profiling in traffic stops, but they may provide a means to lessen their impact on drivers and diminish the incentive to conduct pretextual stops.

[Note 1] Detective Joseph Bombardier had received complaints from one of the apartment's residents concerning heavy foot traffic going in and out of the building at all hours. Bombardier determined that another of the building's residents had previously been charged with drug-related offenses. He therefore decided to conduct surveillance of the building, and suspected, based on his training and experience, that drug activity was being conducted out of the building.

[Note 2] Officer Gary Nelson testified that he measured the vehicle traveling forty-two miles per hour in a thirty mile per hour zone. There is no testimony indicating that the vehicle's lights were still off at the time of the traffic stop.

[Note 3] This stop occurred after the decriminalization of marijuana possession under State law and this court's opinion in Commonwealth v. Cruz, 459 Mass. 459 (2011), which held that, in light of the changed status of marijuana, "the odor of burnt marijuana alone no longer constitutes a specific fact suggesting criminality." Commonwealth v. Overmyer, 469 Mass. 16 , 20 (2014), citing Cruz, supra at 469-472.

[Note 4] The defendant does not challenge the officer's testimony that he saw a firearm.

[Note 5] We acknowledge the briefs submitted by the following amici curiae: Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Economic Justice, Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts, Charles Hamilton Institute for Race and Justice, Massachusetts Law Reform Institute, Union of Minority Neighborhoods, Boston Police Camera Action Team, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, MassEquality, The Network/La Red, Interact: Advocates for Intersex Youth, Theater Offensive, Greater Boston PFLAG, Centro Presente, Brazilian Worker Center, Justice at Work, Justice Resource Institute, Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action, Massachusetts Associate of Hispanic Attorneys, and Massachusetts Black Lawyers Association; Committee for Public Counsel Services and Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, Inc.; and the District Attorney for the Suffolk District.

[Note 6] The Commonwealth conceded that the Whitman police did not have reasonable suspicion of criminal activity justifying an investigatory stop. We do not address whether this was a necessary concession and focus exclusively on the asserted legal basis for the stop, an observed traffic violation.

[Note 7] This is not to say that challenges to established law need not be raised during trial court proceedings in order for them to be entertained on appeal. Such arguments still must be raised below. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Barnes, 399 Mass. 385 , 393-394 (1987) (appellate court not obliged to consider grounds argued on appeal but not raised in motion to suppress).

[Note 8] Article 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights and the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution are distinct sources of this right to be free from arbitrary government action, and in some circumstances, "art. 14 provides more substantive protection to criminal defendants than does the Fourth Amendment in the determination of probable cause." Commonwealth v. Upton, 394 Mass. 363 , 373 (1985).

[Note 9] One year after Santana, the United States Supreme Court decided Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 811-813 (1996), in which the Court adopted an identical test for evaluating the reasonableness of a traffic stop under the Fourth Amendment.

[Note 10] The defendant's general position against pretextual traffic stops mirrors that of the petitioners in Whren, 517 U.S. at 810, which the Supreme Court succinctly summarized: "[The petitioners] argue . . . that 'in the unique context of civil traffic regulations' probable cause [to believe that a traffic violation has occurred] is not enough. Since, they contend, the use of automobiles is so heavily and minutely regulated that total compliance with traffic and safety rules is nearly impossible, a police officer will almost invariably be able to catch any given motorist in a technical violation. This creates the temptation to use traffic stops as a means of investigating other law violations, as to which no probable cause or even articulable suspicion exist."

[Note 11] We have applied this same standard of objective reasonableness when assessing, for instance, the validity of a Terry-type investigatory stop, Commonwealth v. Smigliano, 427 Mass. 490 , 493 (1998) ("Because the facts and circumstances known to the officer are sufficient to create a reasonable suspicion . . . in a reasonable police officer, a Terry stop is justified regardless of the officer's subjective state of mind"); the reasonableness of a search conducted pursuant to the emergency aid exception, Commonwealth v. Tuschall, 476 Mass. 581 , 584-585 (2017) (officers must possess "an objectively reasonable basis" for conclusion that intervention is necessary to save someone who is injured or in imminent danger); and the appropriate scope of a consent-based search, Commonwealth v. Gaynor, 443 Mass. 245 , 255 (2005), quoting Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248, 251 (1991) (scope determined based on "objective reasonableness -- what would the typical reasonable person have understood by the exchange between the officer and the suspect?").

[Note 12] The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit also noted that a rule of reasonableness that hinges on the purity of law enforcement intentions may be all too easily manipulated: "As law enforcement personnel learn that a particular motivation is improper because it will render an otherwise valid search invalid, they may not have difficulty convincing themselves that their conduct was prompted not by the improper reason but the proper one." United States v. Arra, 630 F.2d 836, 845 n.12 (1st Cir. 1980).

[Note 13] We have also recognized that "[a]n arrest or prosecution based on probable cause is ordinarily cloaked with a presumption of regularity." Lora, 451 Mass. at 437.

[Note 14] The defendant is an African-American male; the driver is a Caucasian female.

[Note 15] The defendant quotes extensively from Commonwealth v. Ortiz, 88 Mass. App. Ct. 573 , 576-577 (2015), to argue that we should consider pretext here. In Ortiz, the defendant, who was the subject of surveillance as part of an investigation into cocaine trafficking, was stopped and arrested for switching lanes without signaling; a subsequent inventory search of his vehicle yielded cocaine. Id. at 575. The arresting officer testified that he would not have conducted either the stop or the arrest absent the intention "to employ the inventory policy to search [a] backpack for drugs." Id. at 576-577. The Appeals Court affirmed the trial judge's suppression of the evidence on the ground that the inventory search "was simply a pretext for using the inventory policy to conduct an investigatory search." Id. at 577. Significantly, however, the Appeals Court made no such determination regarding the validity of the initial stop; to the contrary, it correctly acknowledged that "the constitutional reasonableness of traffic stops 'does not depend on the actual motivations of the officer involved.'" Id. at 575 n.5, quoting Whren, 517 U.S. at 813.

[Note 16] See G. L. c. 94C, § 32N (directing police departments to "enforce [G. L. c. 94C, § 32L,] in a manner consistent with the non-criminal disposition provisions of [G. L. c. 40, § 21D]").

[Note 17] Effective December, 2016, the Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana Act states, in pertinent part, that adults shall not be penalized or sanctioned "under the laws of the commonwealth in any manner" for possessing an ounce or less of marijuana. See G. L. c. 94H, § 7 (a) (1).

[Note Budd-1] I note that although most of the data focuses on people of color, other marginalized communities, i.e., groups of people who have historically experienced some form of oppression or exclusion, are also the target of heightened police attention. Transgendered people, for example, have reported facing disproportionate harm by encounters with law enforcement. Activists Say Police Abuse of Transgender People Persists Despite Reforms, New York Times, Sept. 6, 2015.

[Note Budd-2] In Commonwealth v. Warren, 475 Mass. 530 , 540 (2016), when we discussed the related problem of racial profiling in Terry-type stops, we noted "the recurring indignity of being racially profiled."

[Note Budd-3] The following are a few recent examples that have gained national attention. A police officer in Minnesota stopped Philando Castile for a broken taillight. During the encounter, the officer shot him four times, killing him in front of his fiancée and four year old daughter. Woman Streams Aftermath of Fatal Officer-Involved Shooting, Cable News Network, July 8, 2016, http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/07/us/falcon-heights-shooting-minnesota/index.html [https://perma.cc/4P5A-YY28]. In Ohio, the police stopped Samuel DuBose for failing to display a front license plate, and fatally shot him during the stop. The Shooting of Samuel DuBose, New York Times, July 29, 2015. The South Carolina police stopped Walter Scott for a broken taillight, and shot him to death as he fled. Carbado, From Stopping Black People to Killing Black People: the Fourth Amendment Pathways to Police Violence, 105 Cal. L. Rev. 125, 149 (2017). In Texas, a police officer stopped Sandra Bland for failing to signal a lane change. Id. at 150. She was found dead in jail three days later. Id.

Massachusetts is not immune from traffic stop violence. Wakeelah Cocroft, an African-American woman, was a passenger in a vehicle that the police stopped for speeding in Worcester. Cocroft v. Smith, 95 F. Supp. 3d 119, 123 (D. Mass. 2015). During the stop, an officer "forcefully threw Cocroft to the ground and scraped her face against the cement." Id. In a subsequent civil suit, a jury found that the officer had unlawfully seized Cocroft. Id. at 122.

It is also important to note that these examples are not meant to diminish the fact that police officers are at risk during traffic stops as well. Auburn police officer Ronald Tarentino, for example, was shot to death during a traffic stop. Obituary for Fallen Police Officer Ronald Tarentino, Jr., Boston Herald, May 24, 2016, http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_coverage/herald_bulldog/2016/05/obituary_for_fallen_police_officer_ronald_tarentino_jr [https://perma.cc/8GNT-KQRU].

[Note Budd-4] Unconscious or implicit bias is a discriminatory belief or association likely unknown to its holder. Multiple studies confirm the existence of implicit bias, and that implicit bias predicts real-world behavior. See Kang & Banaji, Fair Measures: A Behavioral Realist Revision of "Affirmative Action," 94 Cal. L. Rev. 1063, 1071-1073 (2006). That is, even people who do not believe themselves to harbor implicit bias may in fact act in ways that disfavor people of color.

[Note Budd-5] As the court points out, the defendant did not bring a claim under the equal protection provisions of the Massachusetts Constitution, another fatal blow to mounting a challenge to pretextual stops. Ante at 870-871.

Legal Research: Case Law - Massachusetts

• Case Law - Federal

Case Law - Massachusetts

• Statutory Law - Federal
• Statutory Law - Massachusetts
• Administrative Law Federal and Massachusetts
• Reference Sources, Journal and Law Reviews
• Citation Manual, Dictionaries and Thesauras
• Federal Court System
• Commonwealth of Massachusetts - Court System

This page contains online and paper resources for researching Massachusetts case law. 

The Commonwealth's court system consists of the following courts that decide case law:

• Supreme Judicial Court
• The Court of Appeals

Massachusetts also has the following trial courts:

• Superior Court
• District Court
• Probate Court & Family Court
• Juvenile Court
• Housing Court
• Boston Municipal Court

Resources Provided by MacPhaidin Library

• Nexis Uni This link opens in a new window Nexis Uni features more than 15,000 news, business and legal sources from LexisNexis - including U.S. Supreme Court decisions dating back to 1790 - with an intuitive interface that offers quick discovery across all content types, personalization features such as Alerts and saved searches and a collaborative workspace with shared folders and annotated documents.

MA Court of Appeals Cases from 1972 From December 1972 (1 Mass. App. Ct. 1) through current. Selected unpublished decisions from 2008.

MA Supreme Judicial Court Cases from 1768  Earliest opinion dated March 1768 through current.

Massachusetts Superior Courts – Trial Orders Selected Opinions from all fourteen Massachusetts Superior courts. Coverage is from December 1984 through current. Selected cases available between 1984 and 1992. Selected unpublished decisions from 1993.

MA State Cases, Combined Supreme: From 1804; Appellate: From December 1972; Superior: From January 1993, with selected cases available from 1984 to 1992; Appellate Division: From 1990; Massachusetts Land Court decisions from January, 1993 to present. Selected unpublished decisions from 2008 for Court of Appeals and from 1993 for Superior.

In addition to the above courts, Lexis/Nexis has opinions of the following courts:

Resouces from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Court System

• Office of Reporter of Decisions - Massachusetts Court System

New Published Opinions – Updated daily with new opinions from the SJC and Appeals Court. After two week the opinions can be found in the Archives of Public Opinions.

Archives of Published Opinions - area of the web page you will find access to the published opinions of the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) and Appeals Court released since 2001.  These opinions are fully searchable. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts provides access to this material through Lexis/Nexis.

• << Previous: Case Law - Federal
• Next: Statutory Law - Federal >>
• Last Updated: Sep 11, 2023 10:22 AM
• URL: https://libguides.stonehill.edu/c.php?g=16657

Law and Legal Studies

• Understanding the legal system
• Legal research
• Legal databases
• Encyclopedias and dictionaries
• Law journals
• Constitutions
• Federal statutes
• State statutes
• Federal regulations
• State regulations
• Executive orders
• Federal cases and decisions
• State cases and decisions
• Citing legal sources
• Civil rights law
• Construction law
• Entertainment and sports law
• Environmental law
• Food, hospitality, and tourism law
• Labor and employment law
• Technology law
• Native American and Tribal law
• Foreign and comparative law
• International law
• Current awareness
• Historical law
• Other resources
• Policy research
• Contact us!

Legal research sources

The following resources are books and web pages that provide guidance on how to conduct legal research.

• Law Library of Congress Legal Research Institute A collection of U.S. law webinars, foreign law webinars, and online resources offered by the Law Library of Congress.
• << Previous: Understanding the legal system
• Next: Legal databases >>
• Last Updated: Apr 3, 2024 11:01 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.umass.edu/legal

© 2022 University of Massachusetts Amherst • Site Policies • Accessibility

Library electronic resources outage May 29th and 30th

Between 9:00 PM EST on Saturday, May 29th and 9:00 PM EST on Sunday, May 30th users will not be able to access resources through the Law Library’s Catalog, the Law Library’s Database List, the Law Library’s Frequently Used Databases List, or the Law Library’s Research Guides. Users can still access databases that require an individual user account (ex. Westlaw, LexisNexis, and Bloomberg Law), or databases listed on the Main Library’s A-Z Database List.

• Georgetown Law Library
• U.S. States

Massachusetts Resources

• Cases & Courts
• Getting Started
• Secondary Sources
• Statutes & Legislation
• Regulations & Agencies
• Local Government

Key to Icons

• Georgetown only
• On Bloomberg
• More Info (hover)
• Preeminent Treatise

State Websites

• Slip Opinions from Supreme Judicial, Appeals & Superior Courts

Print Reports

Massachusetts reports (mass.).

• Law Library Call Number: State 1st Floor KFM2445 .A2 : Last updated at Law Library in 2021.
• WorldCat: Mass.
• Library of Congress: Mass.

Massachusetts Appeals Court Reports (Mass. App. Ct.)

• Law Library Call Number: State 1st Floor KFM2448 .M3 : Last updated at Law Library in 2021.
• WorldCat: Mass. App. Ct.
• Library of Congress: Mass. App. Ct.

Historical Reports

• Massachusetts Historical Reports on HeinOnline
• Massachusetts Historical Reports on LLMC DIgitgal
• Massachusetts Historical Trials on LLMC Digital
• Caselaw Access Project: Massachusetts Historical Reports

Docket Search

• Court Dockets for Public Case Information (Mass.gov)

Case Briefs & Records

Massachusetts supreme judicial court records and briefs.

• Harvard Law Library : Microfiche v. 219 - 449 (1914 - 2010).
• Boston College Law Library : Microform v. 219  - (1914 - ).

Massachusetts Appeals Court Records and Briefs

• Harvard Law Library : Microfiche v. 1 - 75 (1972 - 2009).
• Boston College Law Library : Microform vol. 1 - (1972 - ).

Research Guides

• Supreme Judicial Court Case Information (Mass. Jud. Branch)
• Massachusetts Dockets and Court Filings Research (B.C. L. Libr.)

More on Cases in General

• Lexis: Dockets .
•   Westlaw: Dockets: Search Coverage Status by Court or Dockets Index to determine coverage for Georgetown Law accounts. Search Dockets and Court Wire to determine which court materials are covered by the two Westlaw services. Georgetown Law does not have access to Court Wire, but does to Court Wire Alert Archive .
• Bloomberg Law Docket Search: Search Dockets Coverages & Outages for coverage. Docket coverage does not mean, however, that all filings within the coverage dates are held by Bloomberg Law. Also, review our Law Library's FAQ on fees and Bloomberg Law's Docket Search .
• Try searching for dockets on the court's web site. The National Center for State Courts  offers judicial branch links for each state, focusing on the administrative office of the courts, the court of last resort, any intermediate appellate courts, and each trial court level.

Court Records & Documents

• CourtLink and  Briefs, Pleadings and Motions  may be found on Lexis.
• Some  Briefs  and  Trial Court Documents  may be available on  Westlaw .
• To locate state court materials not available within Westlaw, Lexis or Bloomberg Law, review Dockets & Court Documents page in our Briefs, Oral Arguments and Other Court Documents Research Guide.
• Some state appellate courts may make  recordings of oral arguments and hearings  available on their web sites.
• The Law Library's ILL Services, a library-to-library resource sharing service, does not order court materials from a court's clerk. Please contact the court directly for copies.

Massachusetts Court Structure

• About Massachusetts Courts
• Massachusetts Court System
• Supreme Judicial Court
• Appeals Court
• General Information About the Appeals Court

Court Rules in General

May be found in Lexis'  Court Rules and Westlaw's Statutes & Court Rules . Court rules may also be found within the court's web site.

Court Statistics in General

May be found on the court's website, published in the court's administrative office annual reports.

The Florida Courts published a comparative report, State Court Systems Profiles (2010), where each state's court system hierarchy, number of judges, terms of office, governance and funding are summarized.

Case Law Research Tutorial

• << Previous: Regulations & Agencies
• Next: Local Government >>
• © Georgetown University Law Library. These guides may be used for educational purposes, as long as proper credit is given. These guides may not be sold. Any comments, suggestions, or requests to republish or adapt a guide should be submitted using the Research Guides Comments form . Proper credit includes the statement: Written by, or adapted from, Georgetown Law Library (current as of .....).
• Last Updated: Feb 15, 2024 9:51 AM
• URL: https://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/massachusetts

• Find a Lawyer
• Ask a Lawyer
• Research the Law
• Law Schools
• Laws & Regs
• Newsletters
• Justia Connect
• Pro Membership
• Basic Membership
• Justia Lawyer Directory
• Platinum Placements
• Gold Placements
• Justia Elevate
• Justia Amplify
• PPC Management
• Google Business Profile
• Social Media
• Justia Onward Blog

Commonwealth v. Rodriguez-Nieves

The Supreme Judicial Court set aside the verdict in this case, vacated Defendant's conviction, and remanded the matter for a new trial, holding that the prosecutor's failure to disclose certain statements and newly discovered evidence required that this matter be remanded. Defendant was convicted of murder in the first degree on a theory of extreme atrocity or cruelty. Prior to trial, the prosecutor failed to disclose testimony by the stepdaughter of the victim describing the victim's last words. Following trial, a forensic pathologist opined that the victim could not have spoken after he had been stabbed. The Supreme Judicial Court reversed the conviction, holding (1) the prosecutor's failure to disclose the stepdaughter's testimony prejudiced Defendant's ability to prepare and present his defense effectively; and (2) the pathologist's opinion likely would have been a real factor in the jury's deliberations.

The Supreme Judicial Court vacated Defendant's conviction, holding that the prosecutor's failure to disclose certain statements and newly discovered evidence required that this matter be remanded.

Disclaimer: Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

Get free summaries of new Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court opinions delivered to your inbox!

• Bankruptcy Lawyers
• Business Lawyers
• Criminal Lawyers
• Employment Lawyers
• Estate Planning Lawyers
• Family Lawyers
• Personal Injury Lawyers
• Estate Planning
• Personal Injury
• Business Formation
• Business Operations
• Intellectual Property
• International Trade
• Real Estate
• Financial Aid
• Course Outlines
• Law Journals
• US Constitution
• Regulations
• Supreme Court
• Circuit Courts
• District Courts
• Dockets & Filings
• State Constitutions
• State Codes
• State Case Law
• Legal Blogs
• Business Forms
• Product Recalls
• Justia Connect Membership
• Justia Premium Placements
• Justia Elevate (SEO, Websites)
• Justia Amplify (PPC, GBP)
• Testimonials

Massachusetts top court considers allowing website tracking class actions

• Case turns on application of 1960s wiretap law
• Similar lawsuits pending in other states

Get a quick look at the days breaking legal news and analysis from The Afternoon Docket newsletter. Sign up here.

Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. , opens new tab

Thomson Reuters

Nate Raymond reports on the federal judiciary and litigation. He can be reached at [email protected].

Read Next / Editor's Picks

Industry Insight

Mike Scarcella, David Thomas

Karen Sloan

Henry Engler

Diana Novak Jones

Massachusetts Legal Research

• Introduction
• Massachusetts Secondary Sources
• Constitution, Statutes, and Codes
• Administrative Law
• Case Law: Official Reports
• Case Law: Court Rules, Records & Briefs, Dockets
• Research Tools for Primary Materials
• Legislative
• Online Resources

Find Books & Other Materials at BC

Advanced Search

• All Law Library Databases
• All BC Research Databases ​

Ask a Librarian

Click the link to chat with a librarian and ask any questions that you might have or submit a request here .

Court Rules (Print)

• Massachusetts Rules of Court: State. Annual. - St. Paul, MN: West Group. Call Number: KFM2929 .A195 A one-volume collection of court rules, including the rules of civil, criminal and appellate procedure as well as standing orders from the courts. Court rules are also published in the various editions of the General Laws.

Court Rules (Online)

• Westlaw This link opens in a new window Massachusetts Court Rules are also available in Westlaw. more... less... Personal passwords are restricted by our contract to currently enrolled law students and law faculty only.
• Lexis This link opens in a new window Massachusetts Court Rules are also available in LexisNexis. more... less... Personal passwords are restricted by our contract to currently enrolled law students and law faculty only.
• Guide to Massachusetts Evidence Massachusetts has not codified its rules of evidence. Researchers may wish to consult the Evidence volumes of the Mass. Practice series, Call Number KFM2480 .M3, vols. 19 and 20 (also available on Westlaw), as well as the Handbook of Mass. Evidence, Call Number KFM2940 .Z9 L4 2007.
• Massachusetts Court System - Court Rules Links to freely available Massachusetts court rules.

Records and Briefs (Print/Microform)

• Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Records and Briefs. Call Number: KFM2445.9 .S96x Vol. 219 (1914) -. Law Microform. Cabinet 19.
• Massachusetts Appeals Court Records and Briefs Call Number: KFM2445.9 .A66x Vol. 1 (1972) -. Law Microform. Cabinet 19.

Records and Briefs (Online)

• Supreme Judicial Court and Appeals Court of Massachusetts Public Case Information The website contains complete information on cases entered since January 1, 1992 in the Supreme Judicial Court, and since January 1, 1988 in the Appeals Court. To find the briefs filed in a case, use the "Case Search" function to find the docket of the case first. The briefs are linked from the docket page.
• Westlaw Massachusetts Briefs Selective coverage begins with 1999.
• LexisNexis Massachusetts Briefs and Motions Coverage is from 2000 through current.

Massachusetts Court Dockets

• Bloomberg Law (BLAW) This link opens in a new window Bloomberg Law offers access to Massachusetts state court dockets. Browsing by jurisdiction (Massachusetts) and docket access will provide a list of courts and dates of coverage. more... less... Registration Required. Register Online.
• Supreme Judicial Court and Appeals Court of Massachusetts Public Case Information
• Massachusetts Trial Court Information Center Massachusetts Trial Courts have an online docket system. Attorneys may request access by registering with their BBO number and identity.
• << Previous: Case Law: Official Reports
• Next: Research Tools for Primary Materials >>
• Last Updated: Oct 3, 2023 12:23 PM
• URL: https://lawguides.bc.edu/massachusetts

Official websites use .mass.gov

Secure websites use HTTPS certificate

A lock icon ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the official website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• search    across the entire site
• search  in Trial Court Law Libraries
• search  in Executive Office of the Trial Court
• search  in Massachusetts Court System
• This page, Select Massachusetts and federal court cases for "law about" pages: J-N, is   offered by

Trial Court Law Libraries

• Massachusetts Court System

Table of Contents   for the law library, Select Massachusetts and federal court cases for "law about" pages

• Legal topics: A-B 
• Legal topics: C-D 
• Legal topics: E-F 
• Legal topics: G-I 
• Legal topics: J-N 
• Legal topics: O-R 
• Legal topics: S 
• Legal topics: T-Z 

Select Massachusetts and federal court cases for "law about" pages: J-N

Table of contents.

• See also: Law about judges

Chronological index of Judicial Ethics opinions

Subject index of Judicial Ethics opinions

Juries and jury service

• See also: Law about juries and jury service

Butler v. Perry , 240 U.S. 328 (1916) "the  Thirteenth Amendment  ... was adopted with reference to conditions existing since the foundation of our Government, and the term involuntary servitude was intended to cover those forms of compulsory labor akin to African slavery ... It introduced no novel doctrine with respect of services always treated as exceptional, and certainly was  not intended to interdict enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the State, such as services  in the army, militia, on the jury, etc."

Comm. v. Bennefield , 482 Mass. 250 (2019) "At a criminal trial in the District Court, an oral waiver of the right to be tried by the full complement of six jurors is valid , as long as the defendant waives this right knowingly and voluntarily."

Comm. v. Chambers , 93 Mass. App. Ct. 806 (2018) "Discussion of the standard of review of the determination by a judge of juror impartiality ."

Comm. v. Chalue , 486 Mass. 847 (2021) Where polling the jury, a single juror disagreed with the verdict slip . The appendix to this case offers an approach for a judge to take "where, as in this case, a judge is faced with a juror who indicated a verdict at odds with the verdict slip when polled, and who refused to reenter the jury room to deliberate."

Comm. v. DiBenedetto , 94 Mass. App. Ct. 682 (2019) Once a verdict is affirmed by the jury and recorded by the clerk, it is final . When a judge learns, after a guilty verdict has been affirmed and recorded, that the jurors misunderstood the unanimity instruction, he should have accepted the original verdict, instead of sending the jurors out to continue deliberations.

Comm. v. Fernandes , 483 Mass. 1 (2019) Instructing grand juries on lesser offenses and mitigating circumstances "It is generally advisable for prosecutors to instruct grand juries on the elements of lesser offenses and defenses whenever such instructions would help the grand jury to understand the legal significance of mitigating circumstances and defenses."

Comm. v. Fujita , 470 Mass. 484 (2015) A  list of jurors must be  "retained in the court file of the case and be  made available to the public  in the same manner as other court records; further, this court concluded that only on a judicial finding of good cause, which may include a risk of harm to the jurors or to the integrity of their service, may such a list be withheld."

Comm. v. Grassie , 476 Mass. 202 (2017)  Grand Jury proceedings must be recorded . "[T]he entire grand jury proceeding - with the exception of the grand jury's own deliberations - is to be recorded in a manner that permits reproduction and transcription. This shall include any legal instructions provided to the grand jury by a judge or a prosecutor in connection with the proceeding, as well as a record of all those present during the proceeding, excluding the names of the grand jurors."

Comm. v. Hebert , 379 Mass. 752 (1980) Jury nullification .  "Although it is improper for a juror to disregard the law as given by the judge, it remains within the power of a juror to vote his or her conscience."

Comm. v. Lassiter , 80 Mass. App. Ct. 125 (2011) Held that a jury cannot be called back to  re-deliberate  once a verdict has been accepted.

Comm. v. Moore , 474 Mass. 541 (2016) Detailed discussion of Mass. R. Prof. C. 3.5 (c), "regarding an  attorney's ability to communicate, postverdict, with jurors  who deliberated on, or were discharged from, the attorney's client's case," including a suggested jury instruction on contact by attorneys.

Comm. v. Ralph R., a juvenile , 490 Mass. 770 (2022) Conviction vacated and set aside over lack of jury bias inquiry. "In order to safeguard a defendant’s right to an impartial jury, when a judge receives preverdict information that reasonably suggests that a statement reflecting racial, ethnic, or other improper bias was made during jury deliberations, the information 'cannot be ignored.'" 

Comm. v. Shea , 460 Mass. 163 (2011) Provides a short history of allowing  juror note taking , while strongly encouraging note taking to be routinely permitted. "We believe that an accurate memory of detailed facts is as important in a court room as it in a lecture hall or board room, where notetaking is almost invariably permitted. We refer the question whether we should revise our rules to require that jurors be permitted to take notes during some or all trials, or whether we should continue to leave such decisions to the discretion of the judge, to this court's standing advisory committees on the rules of criminal and civil procedure."

Comm. v. Tiscione , 482 Mass. 485 (2019) Discharging distressed juror . "At a criminal trial, the judge erred in discharging a deliberating juror, where, as revealed during a colloquy with the juror, her distress was based not on personal issues alone but also on events that took place in the jury room with her fellow jurors."

Comm. v. Werner , 81 Mass. App. Ct. 689 (2012) Juror use of social media . "More explicit instructions about the use of social media and the Internet may.. be required. Instructions not to talk or chat about the case should expressly extend to electronic communications and social media, and discussions about the use of the Internet should expressly go beyond prohibitions on research. Jurors should not research, describe, or discuss the case on- or off-line. Jurors must separate and insulate their jury service from their digital lives."

Doull v. Foster , 487 Mass. 1 (2021) The court decided "that a but-for standard, rather than a substantial factor standard , is the appropriate standard for factual causation in negligence cases involving multiple alleged causes of the harm."

Jury selection

• See also: Law about jury selection

Federal cases

Batson v. Kentucky , 476 U.S. 79 (1986) "Exclusion of black citizens from service as jurors constitutes a primary example of the evil the Fourteenth Amendment was designed to cure."

Flowers v. Mississippi , 588 U.S. __, 139 S.Ct. 2228 (2019) "The trial court at Curtis Flowers’ sixth murder trial committed clear error in concluding that the state’s peremptory strike of a particular black prospective juror was not motivated in substantial part by discriminatory intent...Reversed and remanded."

Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court of California , 464 U.S. 501 (1984) The court held that the guarantees of open public proceedings in criminal trials embodied in the First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution cover voir dire examination of potential jurors. Trial court cannot close without specific findings that an open proceeding threatened the defendant's right to a fair trial and the right to privacy of the prospective jurors and without considering available alternatives.

Waller v. Georgia , 467 U.S. 39 (1984) Articulates the 4 requirements for closure of a courtroom — overriding public interest, narrowly tailored closure, consideration of reasonable alternatives, and judicial findings supporting closure.

Weaver v. Massachusetts , 582 U.S. 286, 137 S. Ct. 1899 (2017) "[W]hile the public-trial right is important for fundamental reasons, in some cases an unlawful closure might take place and yet the trial still will be fundamentally fair from the defendant’s standpoint...Thus, when a defendant raises a public-trial violation via an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim,...the burden is on the defendant to show either a reasonable probability of a different outcome in his or her case or... to show that the particular public-trial violation was so serious as to render his or her trial fundamentally unfair."

Massachusetts cases

Comm. v. Alves , 96 Mass. App. Ct. 540 (2019) Jurors can't be dismissed simply because they think a witness's use of the "N word" would affect their credibility.

Comm. v. Carter , 488 Mass. 191 (2021) " Sexual orientation is a protected class for purposes of objections alleging discrimination in an opposing party's peremptory challenges to potential jurors."

Comm. v. Colon , 482 Mass. 162 (2019) Racial and ethnic prejudice. Going forward, in cases involving murder, rape, and sexual offenses against children ..., judges should grant a defendant's request for individual voir dire on the issue of racial or ethnic prejudice, if the defendant and the victim are of different racial or ethnic backgrounds."

Comm. v. Downey , 78 Mass. App. Ct. 224 (2010) "Conviction must be reversed because the closure of the courtroom during jury impanelment violated his right to a public trial guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution."

Comm. v. Espinal , 482 Mass. 190 (2019) Non-English speaking defendant . "[W]here the fact of a defendant's inability to speak English is reasonably likely to become known to the jury, we urge the trial judge to inquire, upon the request of the defendant, whether any prospective juror harbors bias toward non-English speakers."

Comm. v. Heywood , 484 Mass. 43 (2020) Blind juror. Given the type of evidence to be presented in a case, it was appropriate to allow a blind juror to serve.

Comm. v. Mitchell , 102 Mass. App. Ct. 831 (2023)  Bias--Juror Questionnaire. "A criminal defendant failed to demonstrate that a juror's inaccurate disclosures during voir dire deprived him of the intelligent exercise of his right to peremptory challenges and entitled him to a new trial without a showing of prejudice."

Comm. v. Shea , 460 Mass 163 (2011) Outlines best practices for voir dire. "The better practice is to ask jurors to raise their hands in response to each question when they answer in the affirmative, request court officers to read the juror numbers of those raising their hands into the record, and allow the parties, the judge, and the court clerk to know (and the record to preserve) who answered "yes" to which question, so that a juror can be reminded of the answer if the juror fails to mention it at sidebar during individual voir dire, and appropriate inquiry can take place."

Comm. v. Robertson , 480 Mass. 383 (2018) "Where a juror’s membership in a protected class is reasonably in dispute, trial judges...ought to presume that the juror is a member of the protected class at issue.

Comm. v. Sanchez, 485 Mass. 491 (2020) Dismissing potential jurors because of race . The court "retired the specific language of Commonwealth v. Soares , 377 Mass. 461, 486, 489-490, cert. denied, 444 U.S. 881 (1979), "that requires, at the first step of an inquiry into potentially improper peremptory challenges on the basis of race, a showing of a "pattern of conduct" and a "likelihood" of exclusion based solely on group membership, and this court adopted the language employed in Federal cases, i.e., that the presumption of propriety in such challenges is rebutted when the totality of the relevant facts gives rise to an inference of discriminatory purpose."

Comm. v. Toolan , 460 Mass. 452 (2011) Defendant was entitled to new trial based on possible juror prejudice where judge failed to question prospective jurors in a way that he could determine each juror was impartial despite exposure to media coverage

Comm. v. Williams , 481 Mass. 443 (2019) Where a prospective juror had expressed the opinion that "the system is rigged against young African American males," the court held that " asking a prospective juror to put aside his or her preconceived notions about the case to be tried is entirely appropriate (and indeed necessary); however, asking him or her to put aside opinions formed based on his or her life experiences or belief system is not."

Juvenile justice system

• See also:   Law about the juvenile justice system

Comm. v. Baez , 480 Mass. 328 (2018) Juvenile offenses can be used as predicate offenses for enhanced penalties.

Comm. v. Cole C. , 92 Mass. App. Ct. 653 (2018) Discusses in detail the jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court over individuals who are indicted as youthful offenders after they turn 18.

Comm. v. J.A., a juvenile , 478 Mass. 385 (2017) A juvenile cannot be indicted as a youthful offender based on charges of cruelty to animals and bestiality, "given that the language in G. L. c. 119, § 54, the youthful offender statute, allowing a juvenile to be tried as a youthful offender for an offense involving the infliction of "serious bodily harm," does not apply to animal as well as human victims."

Comm. v. Manolo M. , 486 Mass. 678 (2021) "[M]ultiple minor misdemeanors arising from the juvenile's first episode of minor misdemeanor misconduct must all be dismissed as a 'first offense.'"

Comm. v. Newton N. , 478 Mass. 747 (2018) "Where a complaint obtained by a police officer is supported by probable cause, a judge cannot dismiss the complaint prior to arraignment even when the judge determines that dismissal before arraignment would serve the best interests of the child and the interests of justice."

Comm. v. Nick N. , 486 Mass. 696 (2021) The rules of evidence in Commonwealth v. Durling , 407 Mass. 108, 114-119 (1990), apply to Wallace W. hearings. The Juvenile Court should promulgate rules for discovery in Wallace W. hearings to provide clarity going forward. 

Comm. v. Preston P. , 483 Mass. 759 (2020) Discussion of the differences between pretrial probation and pretrial conditions of release, and the standard of review for revoking pretrial probation.

Comm. v. Quinones , 95 Mass. App. Ct. 156 (2019) "For Miranda purposes, a juvenile's age must be considered in determining whether the juvenile was subjected to the functional equivalent of police questioning."

Comm. v. Smith , 471 Mass. 161 (2015) Going forward, 17 year olds "must be afforded a meaningful opportunity to consult with an interested adult before waiving Miranda rights."

Deal v. Commissioner of Correction , (Deal I) 475 Mass. 307 (2016); and  Deal II , 478 Mass. 332 (2017) Dept. of Correction must consider juvenile homicide offenders' suitability for minimum security classification on a case-by-case basis. Describes the classification process in great detail.

In the Matter of a Juvenile , 485 Mass. 831 (2020) Due process requires that Juvenile Court judges stay transfer hearings pursuant to G. L. c. 119, § 72A, until the criminal defendant becomes competent to stand trial.

In the Matter of an Impounded Case , 493 Mass. 470 (2024) The SJC ruled that a petitioner's youthful offender records should be sealed under MGL c. 276, § 100B (the "juvenile delinquency sealing statute") rather than § 100A (the "adult criminal record sealing statute").

Kenniston v. Dept. of Youth Services , 453 Mass. 179 (2009) The SJC held that the law permitting DYS to hold 18 year olds for an additional 3 years if they "would be physically dangerous to the public" (G. L. c. 120, §§ 17-19) is unconstitutional "because it violates substantive due process requirements."

Millis Public Schools v. M.P. , 478 Mass. 767 (2018) CRA/Truancy . We conclude that a child "willfully fails to attend school" when he or she acts purposefully, such that his or her behavior arises from reasons portending delinquent behavior." The court vacated a CRA judgment "where nothing in the record suggested that the child's behavior exhibited problems or tendencies that could lead toward juvenile delinquency, and where nothing in the record showed that a modification of the child's custody arrangements would help improve the child's attendance record."

Ulla U. v. Commonwealth , 485 Mass. 219 (2020) Discussion of transfer hearings under M.G.L. c. 119, § 72A and motions to dismiss for bad faith or inexcusable delay .

Wallace W. v. Commonwealth , 482 Mass. 789 (2019) MGL c.119, § 52 requires dismissal of the first minor misdemeanor committed by a juvenile, not the first offense of each different minor misdemeanor. Case creates a court procedure to determine that a juvenile has already committed a first offense.

Comm. v. Perez , (Perez I) 477 Mass. 677 (2017) "Where a juvenile is sentenced for a nonmurder offense or offenses and the aggregate time to be served prior to parole eligibility exceeds that applicable to a juvenile convicted of murder, the sentence cannot be reconciled with art. 26 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights unless, after a hearing considering the appropriate factors, the judge makes a finding that the circumstances warrant treating the juvenile more harshly for parole purposes than a juvenile convicted of murder." Comm. v. Perez  (Perez II), 480 Mass. 562 (2018) Clarifies "the extraordinary circumstances requirement justifying longer periods of incarceration prior to eligibility for parole for juveniles who did not commit murder than for those who did." Comm. v. Terrell , 486 Mass. 596 (2021) A Juvenile Court judge can't order credit for time served ("preadjudication detention credit") when sentencing. Diatchenko v. District Attorney for the Suffolk Dist. , 466 Mass. 655 (2013) The SJC concluded "that the imposition of a sentence of life without the possibility of parole on juveniles who are under the age of eighteen when they commit the crime of murder in the first degree is unconstitutional..." Diatchenko v. District Attorney for the Suffolk Dist. , 471 Mass. 12 (2015) Juvenile homicide offenders serving mandatory sentences of life without parole have a right to counsel at their initial parole hearing, including the right to have counsel appointed if they are indigent. They also have the right to "public funds, if they are indigent, in order to secure reasonably necessary expert assistance at their initial parole hearing." In addition, a juvenile homicide offender who is denied parole has a right to obtain judicial review of the parole board's decision through an action in the nature of certiorari, brought in the Superior Court.

Landlord and tenant

• See also:   Law about landlord and tenant

Ardon v. Kaivas , 92 Mass. App. Ct. 1110 (2017) Intentionally depriving a tenant of access to a common area basement for a period of less than a month did not, without more, rise to the level of a substantial interference with her tenancy.

Blake v. Hometown Communities, Inc. , 486 Mass. 268 (2020) A manufactured home community charged newer residents $96 per month more than they charged other residents. This requirement that some renters pay additional rent for essentially the same lots was a violation of the Manufactured Home Act, G. L. c. 140, § 32L (2).

Creatini v. McHugh , 99 Mass. App. Ct. 126 (2021) A landlord does not bear responsibility to a passerby in the street for injuries caused by a tenant's dog after the dog leaves the landlord's property. 

Karaa v. Yim , 86 Mass. App. Ct. 714 (2014) Discusses  mitigation of damages , stating "who bears the burden at trial regarding the mitigation of damages within the landlord-tenant context is the subject of some uncertainty in Massachusetts." See footnote 10 in the case for an explanation of the uncertainty regarding burden of proof of mitigation of damages, with cites to various sources.

Nutt v. Florio , 75 Mass. App. Ct. 482 (2009) Liability for  bite by tenant's dog . A dog bite victim sued the landlord of the owner of the dog, a pit bull. The court stated that the pit bull is a breed "commonly known to be aggressive." "While the defendants may not be held strictly liable by virtue of Tiny's breed, knowledge of that breed and its propensities may properly be a factor to be considered in determining whether the defendants were negligent under common-law principles."

Phillips v. Equity Residential Management, L.L.C. , 478 Mass. 251 (2017)  Triple damages apply to deductions wrongfully made from a deposit, and not to defects in the statement of damages, such as the failure to include the required statutory pains and penalties wording in the statement.

South Boston Elderly Residences, Inc. v. Moynahan , 91 Mass. App. Ct. 455 (2017)  In a warranty of habitability case, the Appeals Court, applied the tort principle that “the defendant must take its plaintiff as it finds him or her” and held that where material breach of the warranty of habitability occurred, a tenant’s special sensitivity to a condition in the apartment may be considered in the determination of the “diminished value to him” of the premises due to its defective condition.  The Appeals Court also held that a lease which permits a landlord a right to access an apartment for purposes of inspection and repair does not create blanket authority for the landlord to enter at any time without the tenant’s permission in derogation of a tenant’s quiet enjoyment rights under statute.

Worcester v. College Hill Properties, LLC , 465 Mass. 134 (2013) The SJC held that dwellings (apartments) rented to college students are not lodging houses and that landlords do not have to be specifically licensed as operators by the city.

See:   Selected cases about lawyers

Lead poisoning and control

See:   Selected cases about lead poisoning and control

See:   Selected cases about marriage

Massage therapy

See: Selected cases about massage therapy

Mechanics' liens

• See also: Law about mechanics' liens

Blount Bros. Corp. v. Mondev Mass., Inc. , 22 Mass. App. Ct. 96 (1986), affirmed,  Blount Bros. Corp. v. Lafayette Place Assoc. , 399 Mass. 632 (1987) If the date in notices does not correspond to the date in a contract (or informal extensions of a contract), no lien attaches.

City Electric Supply Co. v. Arch Insurance Co. , 481 Mass. 784 (2019) A "target lien bond" dissolves a mechanic's lien that already has attached to a property. This case explains what is needed to enforce a target lien bond.

East Coast Steel Erectors v. Ciolfi , 417 Mass. 602 (1994) A valid lien was established by a notice of contract in which the contractor specified an estimated completion date, none being set forth in the contract, to which the owner did not object within five days of notice.

J & W Wall Systems, Inc., v. Shawmut First Bank & Trust Company , 413 Mass. 42 (1992) A bank that took a deed in lieu of foreclosure was held to be a "purchaser" under MGL 254, § 7, entitled to priority over a notice of lien recorded shortly after the deed.

Mammoet USA, Inc. v. Entergy Nuclear Generation Co. , 64 Mass.App.Ct. 37 (2005) Subcontractor's transportation and delivery charges for shipment of large equipment are not subject to contractor's lien as the equipment did not constitute an "improvement of real property."

National Lumber Co. v. United Casualty and Surety Insurance Company, Inc., et al. , 440 Mass. 723 (2004) A mechanic's lien recorded pursuant to MGL c.254, § 4 does not include contractual interest and attorney's fees incurred in enforcing the lien.

Tremont Tower Condominium LLC v. George B.H. Macomber Co. , 436 Mass. 677 (2002) Clarifies when the right to a mechanics' lien arises, and concludes "the voluntary dissolution of a mechanic's lien under G. L. c. 254, 10, does not prevent a contractor's later recording of another timely notice of contract."

Volpe Construction Co. v. First National Bank of Boston , 30 Mass. App. Ct. 249 (1991) Lien is automatically dissolved if action to enforce is not begun within required period from filing of statement.

Waverly Coop. Bank v. Haner , 273 Mass. 477 (1930) Liens do not have a priority over a mortgage unless the work was actually begun prior to the recording of the mortgage.

Medicaid (MassHealth)

See: Selected cases about Medicaid (MassHealth)

Medical marijuana

See: Selected cases about medical marijuana

See: Selected cases about Medicare

Mental health issues

• See also:   Law about mental health issues

Commonwealth v. A.Z. , 493 Mass. 427 (2024) The SJC held that "it is unconstitutional, as applied, for a court to hospitalize a pretrial defendant under § 15 (b), for a clinical evaluation and observation of competency, absent a finding by the judge, by clear and convincing evidence, that hospitalization is the least restrictive means available to determine adequately a criminal defendant's competency to stand trial."

Garcia v. Commonwealth , 487 Mass. 97 (2021) The temporary involuntary hospitalization of a criminal defendant at a facility other than Bridgewater State Hospital, following a finding that he was not criminally responsible by reason of mental illness violated the defendant's substantive due process rights, where the hospitalization implicated a fundamental liberty right, and where the temporary commitment was not narrowly tailored to a compelling government interest.

In the Matter of D.B. , 2020 Mass. App. Div. 74 (2020) "By executing a health care proxy , an individual can determine in advance that her attorney or another competent person of her choice, rather than a judge, will make ... medical decisions on her behalf," including decisions about antipsychotic medication. 

In the Matter of G.P. , 473 Mass. 112 (2015) "Discussion of G. L. c. 123, § 35, which authorizes... involuntary civil commitment ...where there is a likelihood of serious harm as a result of the person's alcoholism or substance abuse, or both..."  Clear and convincing evidence as standard of proof.

Massachusetts General Hospital v. C.R. , 484 Mass. 472 (2020) Discusses "boarding" of mentally ill patients in emergency departments until an appropriate bed can be found. 

Pembroke Hospital v. D.L. , 482 Mass. 346 (2019) Discharge . If a judge denies a petition for involuntary commitment, the hospital must release the person from involuntary restraint. "A mental health facility discharges an individual under G. L. c. 123 only when that individual is set at liberty from involuntary restraint, and not when he or she is released from care."

Rogers v. Commissioner of the Dept. of Mental Health , 390 Mass. 489 (1983) Outlines the requirements to be met in order to involuntarily administer anti-psychotic medications.

Minimum wage

See: Selected cases about minimum wage

Modifications of family law judgments and orders

• See also: Law about modifications of family law judgments and orders

Ardizoni v. Raymond , 40 Mass. App. Ct. 734 (1996) The standard for modification of child custody/visitation is a material and substantial change of circumstances since the prior judgment was entered and the desired change of child custody/visitation is in the child's best interest.

Barnes v. Devlin , 84 Mass. App. Ct. 159 (2013) A father could not unilaterally stop paying child support under an agreed-upon separation agreement, where he argued that the conditions do not comply with MGL c.208, § 28. His "proper recourse, as the judge stated, would have been to initiate appropriate modification proceedings, as opposed to unilaterally stopping payments."

Cabot v. Cabot , 55 Mass. App. Ct. 756 (2002) If an incorporated separation agreement or a divorce judgment fails to provide for a child's education, a modification complaint may be brought on the ground that the educational costs are a material and substantial change of circumstances.

Calabria v. Calabria , 91 Mass. App. Ct. 763 (2017) “In the circumstances of this case, in which the parties expressly provided for retroactive adjustment of child support in their separation agreement, and where the adjustment fosters the best interest of the couple's minor child and does not derogate (deviate) from the purposes of G. L. c. 119A, § 13, such a retroactive award was within the judge's equitable authority.”

Cavanagh  v. Cavanagh , 490 Mass. 398 (2022) Alimony Reform Act does not prohibit an award of alimony when child support has been ordered, interpreting G.L. c.208, § 53(c)(2).

Feinstein v. Feinstein , 95 Mass. App. Ct. 230 (2019) In this case, the Appeals Court found: “A probate Court has the power to modify a child support order in the context of either a complaint for contempt or a complaint for modification.  A modification on a complaint for contempt may occur even in the absence of a contempt finding.”

Malachi M. v. Quintina Q. , 483 Mass. 725 (2019) "In a proceeding to modify a child custody decision, the judge must consider evidence of domestic abuse that occurred before the entry of the divorce judgment ."

Morales v. Morales , 464 Mass. 507 (2013) "We conclude that the trial judge ... erred in applying a standard requiring a material and substantial change in circumstances (material and substantial change standard) rather than the standard set forth in G. L. c. 208, § 28... which provides that a child support order shall be modified 'if there is an inconsistency between the amount of the existing order and the amount that would result from application of the child support guidelines'. (inconsistency standard)."

Smith v. Edelman , 68 Mass. App. Ct. 549 (2007) "A substantial post-divorce increase in the income of the noncustodial parent did not [warrant] an increase in child support, where the children's needs were well met and where there was no material disparity in the standards of living between the custodial and noncustodial households." “The goal of maintaining the standard of living of the family as though it had remained intact is not without limit; an increase in child support based solely on an increase in income of the noncustodial spouse may have the effect of constructively distributing the noncustodial parent’s estate, and is accordingly disfavored.”

Whelan vs. Whelan , 74 Mass. App. Ct. 616 (2009) A “judge must determine whether claimed business deductions are reasonable and necessary to the production of income, without regard to whether those deductions may be claimed for Federal or State income tax purposes.”

Mortgage foreclosure

• See also: Law about mortgage foreclosure

Bank of NY v. Bailey , 460 Mass. 327 (2011) "[T]he Housing Court has jurisdiction to decide the validity of a challenge to a title, raised by a former homeowner as a defense to a summary process eviction action by a party acquiring the property pursuant to a foreclosure sale."

HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Morris, et al. , 490 Mass. 322 (2022) A borrower can assert a Predatory Home Loan Practices Act (PHLPA) counterclaim in a summary process action brought by a mortgage assignee to obtain possession following a nonjudicial foreclosure. Includes discussion of the claims that can be brought under PHLPA.

HSBC Bank USA, N.A., Trustee v. Matt , 464 Mass. 193 (2013) An oft-cited case in the Land Court concerning the limited scope and nature of a Servicemembers case in the larger context of a foreclosure.

James B. Nutter & Co. v. Murphy , 478 Mass. 664 (2018) A  reverse mortgage  did not contain the formal language of "statutory power of sale," but only said that the company could “invoke the power of sale and other remedies permitted by applicable law." The SJC held that, given that this was a reverse mortgage, and not a traditional mortgage, "where the lender cannot hold the borrower personally liable for the debt, and where the lender’s only recourse on default is to obtain repayment through a foreclosure sale," "the only reasonable and practical interpretation of the mortgage was that it incorporated the statutory power of sale."

Lenders Commercial Finance LLC v. Pestilli, et al , Southeast Housing Court (Feb. 3, 2017) A bank that purchased a home at foreclosure could not evict the former owners with just a 30-day notice to quit. "The Court finds that there is no evidence in this action that there was ever any agreement between the parties for the defendant to pay any rent to the plaintiff, or for any definite rental period. Accordingly, the court finds that G.L. c. 186, s.12 requires that the plaintiff terminate the defendant's tenancy at will by service of a 90 Day Notice to Quit for possession." 

Property Acquisition Group v. Ivester , 95 Mass. App. Ct. 170 (2019) Before conducting a foreclosure sale, the mortgagee must use reasonable diligence to determine the fair market value of the property.

Tyler v. Hennepin County, Minnesota, et al. , 598 U.S. 631 (2023) Home equity. Profits exceeding what is owed during a foreclosure belong to the former property owner as it "constitute[s] a taking of property without just compensation, in violation of the Fifth Amendment."

US Bank National Association v. Ibanez , 458 Mass. 637 (2011) Upholds the ruling in in U.S. Bank National Association v. Ibanez , 17 LCR 679, Land Court MISC 08-384283 (October 14, 2009), regarding the requirement that mortgage holders must be accurately identified in a foreclosure proceeding. "We agree with the judge that the plaintiffs, who were not the original mortgagees, failed to make the required showing that they were the holders of the mortgages at the time of foreclosure. As a result, they did not demonstrate that the foreclosure sales were valid to convey title to the subject properties, and their requests for a declaration of clear title were properly denied."

Mortgage loans, brokers, and lenders

See: Selected cases about mortgage loans, brokers, and lenders

Name changes

See: Selected cases about name changes

Neighbors and trees

• See also: Law about neighbors and trees

Bassin v. Fairley , 22 LCR 251 (11 MISC 451773) (Land Court, 2014) Where a healthy  tree straddles the property line , the property owners "each hold title to a portion of [the tree], and thus neither can take any action against their portion of [the tree] that would injure [the tree] as a whole." Furthermore, (in accordance with the Restatement of the Law, Torts 2d) a person can only enter property to cut the tree of another if it is an emergency situation, or if they have permission.

Evans v. Mayer Tree Service, Inc. , 89 Mass. App. Ct. 137 (2016)  A tree company cut down trees at the specific direction of a Federal official who mistakenly believed that the plaintiff had given written permission to have the trees destroyed. Appeals court vacated the dismissal and remanded to Superior Court. " So long as the act of cutting was intentional and the act was without license, liability exists -- albeit for single damages only  -- even where the person cutting the trees had "good reason to believe" he was "lawfully authorized" to do so."

Glavin v. Eckman , 71 Mass. App. Ct. 313 (2008) Martha's Vineyard property owners and their tree contractor cut down ten mature trees on a neighbor's property to improve their own view of the ocean. The court upheld a jury award granting the wronged property owner the $30,000  replacement cost  of the trees, rather than damages measured by the worth of the timber or diminution of the property's value.

Jones v. Town of Great Barrington , 273 Mass. 483 (1930) Town was liable for injuries caused by a falling tree where the town , "although notified of its condition, had permitted to stand within the limits of the way for so long a time and in so decayed and dangerous a condition that it constituted a nuisance: ... that the tree was within the exclusive control of the tree warden ... and that his power to remove the tree was limited and prescribed by the terms of G. L. c. 87, did not relieve the defendant of liability for the nuisance."

Kurtigan v. City of Worcester , 348 Mass. 284 (1965) **(Superseded by Statute as Stated in Hanna v. Town of Framingham, Mass. App. Ct., February 11, 2004)** City was held liable for damages caused by limbs of dead tree falling  from property which city acquired for nonpayment of taxes. "Public policy in a civilized community requires that there be someone to be held responsible for a private nuisance on each piece of real estate, and, particularly in an urban area, that there be no oases of nonliability where a private nuisance may be maintained with impunity."

Levine v. Black , 312 Mass. 242 (1942) Court refused to grant an injunction barring one neighbor from cutting down a tree sitting on the property line, where evidence showed that previous work on the tree had reduced it to "a trunk and two limbs."

Michalson v. Nutting , 275 Mass. 232 (1931) The owner of a tree is not responsible for the damage its roots cause to neighboring property, but the neighbor's "right to cut off the intruding boughs and roots is well recognized."

Ponte v. DaSilva , 388 Mass. 1008 (1983). "The failure of a landowner to prevent the blowing or dropping of leaves, branches, and sap from a healthy tree onto a neighbor's property is not unreasonable and cannot be the basis of a finding of negligence or private nuisance."

Ritter v. Bergmann , 72 Mass. App. Ct. 296 (2008) Clarifies that the "Glavin case does not require that there be a personal reason to support utilizing restoration cost as a measure of damages...Here, the damage to the Ritters that resulted from the cutting down of trees on the lot adjacent to their home was not only the potential loss in the value of the land that they hoped to sell, but the loss of their own privacy -- regardless of whether lot 11 was sold or retained."

Shiel v. Rowell , 480 Mass. 106 (2018) Upholds the "Massachusetts rule"  that "an individual whose property is damaged by a neighbor's healthy tree has no cause of action against a landowner of the property upon which the tree lies." Property owners who are disturbed by their neighbor's trees are "not without recourse," though. They remain free to remove any part of the tree that crosses the property line.

Wellesley Conservation Council v. Pereira , Civil No. 17-863 (Norfolk Super. Ct.) (2018), 35 Mass. Law Reporter 113 (2018) A conservation council, as grantee of the conservation restriction on defendants' property, may not recover monetary damages from defendants because defendants cut trees on their property in violation of the conservation restriction .

Noncompetition agreements

See: Selected cases about noncompetition agreements

Nonprofit corporations and charitable organizations

See: Selected cases about nonprofit corporations and charitable organizations

Notaries public

See: Selected cases about notaries public

Contact   for Select Massachusetts and federal court cases for "law about" pages: J-N

• Massachusetts law about... 
• Massachusetts Court Cases 
• Ask a Law Librarian 
• Request documents from the law libraries 

Help Us Improve Mass.gov   with your feedback

The feedback will only be used for improving the website. If you need assistance, please contact the Trial Court Law Libraries . Please limit your input to 500 characters.

Thank you for your website feedback! We will use this information to improve this page.

If you need assistance, please contact the Trial Court Law Libraries .

If you would like to continue helping us improve Mass.gov, join our user panel to test new features for the site.