Mass. Gen. Laws » Part I Title XVII Chapter 123B
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 123B, § 3 (2026)

Transfers; notice to guardian or relative; consent; objection; hearing; right to counsel; emergency transfer

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 3. The department shall notify and consult with the permanent guardian or, if there is no such guardian and the person with an intellectual disability does not knowingly object, the nearest relative of a person with an intellectual disability, prior to the transfer of said person from one residential facility for the mentally retarded to another. Such notice shall be given at least forty-five days prior to the proposed transfer.

If a permanent guardian has been appointed for a person with an intellectual disability who is receiving residential services through the department, said department shall request said guardian's consent prior to the transfer by the department of said person with an intellectual disability from one residential facility for persons with an intellectual disability to another. Said consent shall be requested in writing by registered mail, at least forty-five days prior to the proposed transfer. The request for consent shall include (1) a statement of how the proposed residential transfer from the current facility to the proposed residential facility will result in improved services and quality of life for the intellectually disabled ward, (2) the location of the proposed facility and a statement that said guardian may examine the facility, and (3) a statement of the rights of said guardian established by this section. Any objection by the guardian to the proposed transfer shall be in writing and shall contain a statement of the reasons upon which the objection is based. Failure to object in writing within forty-five days shall be deemed to be a consent to said transfer. If the guardian files an objection, the transfer shall not occur unless the department prevails at an adjudicatory proceeding pursuant to this section.

If the individual service plan developed for the person with an intellectual disability by the department pursuant to its regulations cannot be fully implemented as a result of the guardian's objection to a proposed transfer, the department shall, with twenty days of receipt of said objection, file a request for an adjudicatory proceeding with the division of administrative law appeals established by section four H of chapter seven, whereupon said division shall be authorized to conduct said proceeding to determine whether the transfer should proceed. The division shall conduct an adjudicatory hearing within ninety days in accordance with the provisions of chapter thirty A, and the burden of proof shall be on the department. During the pendency of said hearing the proposed residential transfer shall not occur. Said person with an intellectual disability shall have the right to be represented by counsel. The hearing officer shall determine which placement meets the best interest of the ward giving due consideration to the objections to the placement made by the relative or permanent guardian. The hearing officer shall issue a decision within thirty days of the hearing. After the hearing officer renders a written decision the parties shall have twenty days in which to appeal the decision to the superior court and the court shall hear such appeal as expeditiously as possible in open court or in chambers, and at such time and upon such notice, if notice is required as it in its discretion determines.

Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, in the case of an emergency, a transfer from one residential facility for persons with an intellectual disability to another may be made immediately, provided, however, that no person with an intellectual disability shall be transferred to a facility for the mentally ill and notice of said transfer shall be given to said guardian or relative pursuant to this section within eight hours after said transfer. Failure by said guardian to object in writing within forty-five days of said notice shall be deemed to be a consent to said transfer. In all other respects, the standards and procedures governing a non-emergency transfer shall be the same as those governing an emergency transfer.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1994–2014 · leading case: Molly A. v. Comm'r of the Dep't of Mental Retardation, 867 N.E.2d 350 (Mass. App. Ct. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Molly A. v. Comm'r of the Dep't of Mental Retardation, 867 N.E.2d 350 (Mass. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 8× “In count I, the parents asserted that the DMR *275 was required to comply with the transfer statute, G. L. c. 123B, § 3, and prevail at an adjudicatory hearing before effecting a transfer of placement, because the DMR had already begun *276 funding Molly’s stay at Crotched…”
Davidson v. Howe, 749 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2014). · cites it 4× “2d at 865 ; see Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 123B, § 3. Plaintiffs objected and DDS referred the matter to the Massachusetts Division of Administrative Law Appeals.”
M.D. v. Dep't of Developmental Servs., 985 N.E.2d 863 (Mass. App. Ct. 2013). · cites it 10× “This notice is required by G. L. c. 123B, § 3, inserted by St. 1986, c.”
G.R. v. Dep't of Developmental Servs., 4 N.E.3d 926 (Mass. App. Ct. 2014). · cites it 9× “See G. L. c. 123B, § 3. 3 We focus our analysis on whether the Department of Developmental Services (DDS) presented the administrative magistrate at the DALA hearing with substantial evidence to support her decision that the interfacility transfer would be in G.”
J.W. v. Dep't of Developmental Servs., 86 Mass. App. Ct. 374 (Mass. App. Ct. 2014). · cites it 12× “under the provisions of G. L. c. 123B, §3. 4 *375 J.W. is a profoundly mentally disabled, visually impaired, and nonverbal individual.”
Ricci v. Patrick, 544 F.3d 8 (1st Cir. 2008). “” Mass. Gen. Laws. ch. 123B, § 3. The objecting party may then seek judicial review of the hearing officer’s decision through appeal to superior court.”
M.M. v. Dep't of Developmental Servs., 4 N.E.3d 906 (Mass. App. Ct. 2014). · cites it 4× “3 See G. L. c. 123B, § 3. Our analysis here involves whether, during the DALA hearing, the Department of Developmental Services (DDS) presented the administrative magistrate with substantial evidence to support his decision that the interfacility transfer would result in…”
E.G. v. Dep't of Developmental Servs., 4 N.E.3d 915 (Mass. App. Ct. 2014). · cites it 3× “See G. L. c. 123B, § 3. A judge of the Superior Court subsequently affirmed DALA’s decision.”
J.W. v. Dep't of Developmental Servs., 996 N.E.2d 483 (Mass. App. Ct. 2013). · cites it 5× “See G. L. c. 123B, § 3, as amended through St.”
P.D. v. Dep't of Developmental Servs., 4 N.E.3d 920 (Mass. App. Ct. 2014). · cites it 2× “See G. L. c. 123B, § 3. The guardians appeal from a Superior Court judgment affirming that decision.”
M.A.K. v. Dep't of Developmental Servs., 985 N.E.2d 860 (Mass. App. Ct. 2013). “See G. L. c. 123B, § 3, and 115 Code Mass. Regs.”
Grady ex rel. Grady v. Campbell, 2 Mass. L. Rptr. 587 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1994). · cites it 5× “DMR never gave notice to the guardians, as described in G.L.c. 123B, §3, of the proposed transfers.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.