Mass. Gen. Laws » Part III Title I Chapter 213
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 213, § 3 (2026)

Rules; power to make and promulgate

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

Section 3. The courts shall, respectively, make and promulgate uniform codes of rules, consistent with law, for regulating the practice and conducting the business of such courts in cases not expressly provided for by law, for the following purposes:

First, Simplifying and shortening pleadings and procedure.

Second, Prescribing the terms upon which amendments will be allowed or unnecessary counts and statements stricken from the record; discouraging negligence and deceit; preventing delay; securing parties from being misled; placing the party not in fault as nearly as possible in the condition in which he would have been if no mistake had been made; distinguishing between form and substance; and substituting fixed and certain requirements for the discretion of the court.

Third, Conducting trials.

Fourth, Presenting distinctly the questions to be tried by the jury.

Fifth, Giving a party such notice of the evidence which is intended to be offered by the adverse party as will prevent surprise and enable him to prepare for trial.

Sixth, Prescribing such forms of verdicts as will place upon record the finding of the jury.

Seventh, The entry of judgment by the clerk under a general order in all cases ripe for judgment.

Eighth, Expediting the decision of causes and securing the speedy trial thereof.

Ninth, Remedying abuses and imperfections in practice and diminishing costs.

Tenth, Filing and hearing motions to set aside verdicts and notifying adverse parties thereof.

Tenth A, Making effective the declaratory procedure provided by chapter two hundred and thirty-one A.

Eleventh, The superior court may also make and promulgate such rules for the regulation of the printing, publication and distribution of trial lists and for notifying attorneys of trials in civil causes as the public convenience in the several counties requires.

The rules of the superior court, promulgated under the authority of this section, shall be subject to the approval of the supreme judicial court.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1924–2008 · leading case: State v. DeJesus, 953 A.2d 45 (Conn. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. DeJesus, 953 A.2d 45 (Conn. 2008). · cites it 2× “190 (West 2004); see also Mass. Gen. Laws c. 213, § 3 (LexisNexis 1999) (authorizing lower courts to adopts rules, but subjecting rules to approval by Supreme Judicial Court).”
Fuller v. Trs. of Deerfield Academy, 252 Mass. 258 (Mass. 1925). “If the rule making power of the courts under G. L. c. 213, § 3, Second, extends to such a matter, the court has not yet exercised its power to that end.”
Commonwealth v. Brown, 481 N.E.2d 469 (Mass. 1985). “The defendant argues that the procedure outlined above was not in compliance with Rule 6 of the Rules of the Superior Court (1974), and that the judge’s failure to follow the procedure set forth in the rule constituted reversible error.”
Brown v. Grow, 249 Mass. 495 (Mass. 1924). “G. L. c. 213, § 3. A similar rule first was promulgated as Rule 55 of the Superior Court (1915).”
Carp v. Kaplan, 146 N.E. 779 (Mass. 1925). “It is a proper requirement that a motion for a directed verdict be a separate matter, dissociated from requests for particular instructions to the jury.”
Jenkins v. Gen. Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp., 212 N.E.2d 464 (Mass. 1965). “The Corporation also argues that JenMns could not im-plead it because of a policy provision which states: “No action shall lie against the corporation unless . . . the amount of the insured’s obligation to pay shall have been finally determined .”
Jenkins v. Gen. Accident Fire & Life Assu. Corp., Ltd., 212 N.E.2d 464 (Mass. 1965). “The Corporation also argues that Jenkins could not implead it because of a policy provision which states: "No action shall lie against the corporation unless .”
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.