Massachusetts General Laws
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 142A, § 4 (2026)
Arbitration; appeals
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MAmalegislature.gov (official)
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Section 4. (a) There shall be a private arbitration services program approved by the director, to consider disputes between owners and registered contractors and subcontractors, concerning or arising from contracts for residential contracting services. No claim may be filed for arbitration after 5 years from the date of the contract. Such arbitration shall be performed by private arbitration services approved by said director, and shall operate in accordance with the regulations promulgated by the director. Either party may elect to pursue an action in small claims court if the amount of the dispute is within small claims jurisdiction.
(b) All registered contractors and subcontractors who enter into contracts for residential contracting impliedly consent to the provisions contained in this section.
(c) A contractor or subcontractor who is required to submit to arbitration as a result of an owner's application for arbitration may file a counterclaim, based on or arising from the same contract, in that arbitration.
(d) All findings of fact issuing from arbitration shall be taken as prima facie evidence in any subsequent appeal brought by either party ensuing from the matter considered in said arbitration.
(e) A contractor, subcontractor or homeowner may also appeal the decision of an arbitrator for a trial de novo in superior court or district court. Such appeal must be filed within twenty-one days from the issuance of such findings and shall stay any work or payment to the owner, contractor or subcontractor.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases, 1994–2016 · leading case: Duff v. McKay, 52 N.E.3d 203 (Mass. App. Ct. 2016).
Duff v. McKay, 52 N.E.3d 203 (Mass. App. Ct. 2016). “4 As a result, the 3 Pursuant to G. L. c. 142A, § 4, the director of the Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation created an arbitration program through which homeowners can resolve disputes with home improvement contractors they hired.”
Porcaro v. O'Rourke, 2008 Mass. App. Div. 218 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 2008). “The evidence supports the findings of the trial judge, who saw and heard all the witnesses and who was permitted by statute to give the arbitrator’s award prima facie effect under G.Lc. 142A, §4 (d). “In applying the clearly erroneous standard, due deference must be given to the…”
O'Rorke v. Porcaro (In re Porcaro), 545 B.R. 384 (1st Cir. BAP 2016). “See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 142A, § 4(e). Both parties presented evidence, including expert testimony.”
Simas v. House of Cabinets, Inc., 757 N.E.2d 277 (Mass. App. Ct. 2001). “G. L. c. 142A, § 4. This program is made available not only in cases where the parties have contracted to use it, as was the case here, but also at the homeowner’s request, in cases where there is no arbitration agreement.”
Booth v. Augis, 889 N.E.2d 59 (Mass. App. Ct. 2008). “Neither the original nor the amended complaint in Booth I (apparently raising a single claim under G. L. c. 142A, § 4[e]) was included in the record appendix.”
Masterpiece Kitchen & Bath, Inc. v. Gordon, 680 N.E.2d 1150 (Mass. 1997). “In accordance with G. L. c. 142A, § 4 ( ?), the decision stated that an appeal must be filed within twenty-one days of the mailing date of the decision.”
Capstone Bldg. & Constr., LLC v. Payne, 26 Mass. L. Rptr. 215 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2009). “On December 24, 2008, the plaintiff, Capstone Building & Construction LLC (“Capstone”), brought this action against the defendant, Donna Payne (“Payne”), pursuantto G.L.c. 142A, §4, seeking a de novo trial after an arbitrator’s decision.”
Heritage Constr. & Dev., Inc. v. O'Connor, 25 Mass. L. Rptr. 1 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2008). “G.L.c. 142A, §4(d). A contractor, subcontractor or homeowner may appeal the decision of an arbitrator for a trial de novo in Superior Court or District Court within twenty-one days from the issuance of the arbitrator’s findings.”
Masterpiece Kitchen & Bath, Inc. v. Gordon, 1994 Mass. App. Div. 193 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1994). “This proviso correctly restated the time requirements set forth in both G.L.c. 142A, §4(e) 3 and 201 CMR 14 .7 (4) 4 for a judicial appeal of an arbitration order.”
Heinrichs v. Ricciardi, 25 Mass. L. Rptr. 44 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2008). “In January 2005, the Heinrichses filed a claim for arbitration of their dispute pursuant to G.L.c. 142A, §4. The Respondent in that action was listed as Michael Ricciardi of Ricciardi Construction Company, who was further described as the “individual responsible for Home…”
Groleau v. Russo-Gabriele, 32 Mass. L. Rptr. 513 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2014). “Faced with findings by an arbitrator of a low recovery, which have prima facie effect in this court (G.L.c. 142A, §4{d)), economics and rational business decision-making would dictate accepting the award and moving on.”
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 142A, § 4(a): 1 case
Capstone Bldg. & Constr., LLC v. Payne, 26 Mass. L. Rptr. 215 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2009). “On December 24, 2008, the plaintiff, Capstone Building & Construction LLC (“Capstone”), brought this action against the defendant, Donna Payne (“Payne”), pursuantto G.L.c. 142A, §4, seeking a de novo trial after an arbitrator’s decision.”
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 142A, § 4(b): 2 cases
Porcaro v. O'Rourke, 2008 Mass. App. Div. 218 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 2008). “The evidence supports the findings of the trial judge, who saw and heard all the witnesses and who was permitted by statute to give the arbitrator’s award prima facie effect under G.Lc. 142A, §4 (d). “In applying the clearly erroneous standard, due deference must be given to the…”
Capstone Bldg. & Constr., LLC v. Payne, 26 Mass. L. Rptr. 215 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2009). “On December 24, 2008, the plaintiff, Capstone Building & Construction LLC (“Capstone”), brought this action against the defendant, Donna Payne (“Payne”), pursuantto G.L.c. 142A, §4, seeking a de novo trial after an arbitrator’s decision.”
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 142A, § 4(d): 3 cases
Porcaro v. O'Rourke, 2008 Mass. App. Div. 218 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 2008). “The evidence supports the findings of the trial judge, who saw and heard all the witnesses and who was permitted by statute to give the arbitrator’s award prima facie effect under G.Lc. 142A, §4 (d). “In applying the clearly erroneous standard, due deference must be given to the…”
Heritage Constr. & Dev., Inc. v. O'Connor, 25 Mass. L. Rptr. 1 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2008). “G.L.c. 142A, §4(d). A contractor, subcontractor or homeowner may appeal the decision of an arbitrator for a trial de novo in Superior Court or District Court within twenty-one days from the issuance of the arbitrator’s findings.”
Capstone Bldg. & Constr., LLC v. Payne, 26 Mass. L. Rptr. 215 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2009). “On December 24, 2008, the plaintiff, Capstone Building & Construction LLC (“Capstone”), brought this action against the defendant, Donna Payne (“Payne”), pursuantto G.L.c. 142A, §4, seeking a de novo trial after an arbitrator’s decision.”
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 142A, § 4(e): 6 cases
O'Rorke v. Porcaro (In re Porcaro), 545 B.R. 384 (1st Cir. BAP 2016). “See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 142A, § 4(e). Both parties presented evidence, including expert testimony.”
Porcaro v. O'Rourke, 2008 Mass. App. Div. 218 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 2008). “The evidence supports the findings of the trial judge, who saw and heard all the witnesses and who was permitted by statute to give the arbitrator’s award prima facie effect under G.Lc. 142A, §4 (d). “In applying the clearly erroneous standard, due deference must be given to the…”
Booth v. Augis, 889 N.E.2d 59 (Mass. App. Ct. 2008). “Neither the original nor the amended complaint in Booth I (apparently raising a single claim under G. L. c. 142A, § 4[e]) was included in the record appendix.”
Capstone Bldg. & Constr., LLC v. Payne, 26 Mass. L. Rptr. 215 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2009). “On December 24, 2008, the plaintiff, Capstone Building & Construction LLC (“Capstone”), brought this action against the defendant, Donna Payne (“Payne”), pursuantto G.L.c. 142A, §4, seeking a de novo trial after an arbitrator’s decision.”
Masterpiece Kitchen & Bath, Inc. v. Gordon, 1994 Mass. App. Div. 193 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1994). “This proviso correctly restated the time requirements set forth in both G.L.c. 142A, §4(e) 3 and 201 CMR 14 .7 (4) 4 for a judicial appeal of an arbitration order.”
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.