Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 138, § 63 (2026)

Entry of licensing authorities upon licensed premises; taking of samples

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 63. The local licensing authorities or their agents may at any time enter upon the premises of a person who is licensed by them, and the commission or its agents may enter upon the premises of any holder of a license, permit or certificate of fitness under this chapter, to ascertain the manner in which he conducts the business carried on under such license, permit or certificate. Such licensing authorities or their agents may at any time take samples for analysis from any beverages or alcohol kept on such premises, and the vessel or vessels containing such samples shall be sealed on the premises in the presence of the holder of such license, permit or certificate or one of his employees, and shall remain so sealed until presented to the state department of public health for analysis, and duplicate samples shall be left with such holder.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1925–2005 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Certain Intoxicating Liquors, 149 N.E. 613 (Mass. 1925).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. Certain Intoxicating Liquors, 149 N.E. 613 (Mass. 1925). “” The statute (G. L. c. 138, § 63) provides that the warrant shall allege “the person believed to be the owner, possessor, or keeper .”

Commonwealth v. Ficksman, 166 N.E.2d 726 (Mass. 1960). “G. L. c. 138, § 63. An operator shall produce a permit to transport and deliver alcoholic beverages or alcohol on the demand of an investigator.”

Edward P. Clark Post 107, Am. Legion, Inc. v. Town of Natick Bd. of Selectmen, 19 Mass. L. Rptr. 586 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2005). · cites it 2× “Notably, in Justice Giles’ review of this Count II claim on the defendants’ motion to dismiss, she made the following observations (if not a legal interpretation of G.L.c. 138, §63 et seq.): “The American Legion is correct in asserting that under G.”

Corcoran, Mullins & Jennison, Inc. v. Flanagan, 10 Mass. L. Rptr. 309 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1999). · cites it 2× “Similarly, G.L.c. 138, §63 and G.L.c. 140, §201, cited by Bayside as support for the Boston Police Department’s ability to require paid details, do no more than allow certain persons to be present during shows taking place on a premise licensed to serve alcoholic beverages.”

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.