Section 1. The supreme judicial and superior courts shall have original and concurrent jurisdiction of all cases and matters of equity cognizable under the general principles of equity jurisprudence and, with reference thereto, shall be courts of general equity jurisdiction, except that the superior court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction of all actions in which injunctive relief is sought in any matter involving or growing out of a labor dispute as defined in section twenty C of chapter one hundred and forty-nine.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 85
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1922–2026 · leading case: Schaefer v. Yongjie Fu, 272 F. Supp. 3d 285 (D. Mass. 2017).
Schaefer v. Yongjie Fu, 272 F. Supp. 3d 285 (D. Mass. 2017). · cites it 5דG.L.. c.214, § 1(C) (Count VII) and negligence (Count VIII) against BU.”
Bank of Am., N.A. v. Rosa, 999 N.E.2d 1080 (Mass. 2013). · cites it 2דAlthough the “separate *622 action” could be entered in the Superior Court pursuant to its general equity jurisdiction, see G. L. c. 214, § 1, the action nevertheless had to be separate from the summary process action even if both were filed in the Superior Court.”
Levy v. Acting Governor, 435 Mass. 697 (Mass. 2002). · cites it 5דThe plaintiffs, Jordan Levy and Christy Peter Mi-hos, filed a verified complaint in the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County pursuant to G. L. c. 214, § 1, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against the defendants, the Acting Governor 1 (Governor) and the Secretary…”
Rogers v. Comm'r of the Dep't of Mental Health, 458 N.E.2d 308 (Mass. 1983). · cites it 2ד215, § 6 (concurrent jurisdiction of the Probate and Superior Courts as to “all matters relative to guardianship and conservatorship”); Custody of a Minor, 375 Mass. 733, 743-744 (1978); or in the Juvenile Courts or juvenile sessions of the District Courts, see G.”
Ruffino v. State Street Bank & Trust Co., 908 F. Supp. 1019 (D. Mass. 1995). · cites it 2דGenerally, M.G.L. c. 214, § 1 confers equitable jurisdiction on the supreme judicial court and superior court.”
DeGiacomo v. City of Quincy, 63 N.E.3d 365 (Mass. 2016). “In February, 2014, the successor trustee filed a complaint against Quincy and the Society in the county court, invoking this court’s equity authority under G. L. c. 214, § 1. The complaint alleged that Quincy violated its fiduciary duty to the Woodward School by failing to…”
U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Schumacher, 467 Mass. 421 (Mass. 2014). “See G. L. c. 214, § 1 (granting Superior Court “original and concurrent jurisdiction [with the Supreme Judicial Court] of all cases and matters of equity cognizable under the general principles of equity jurisprudence”); Wayne Inv.”
Penal Institutions Comm'r v. Comm'r of Corr., 416 N.E.2d 958 (Mass. 1981). · cites it 2ד231 A; G. L. c. 214, § 1. In support of this argument, he cites his duty to administer the facilities at Deer Island in a manner not inconsistent with the “rules made by the commissioner of correction under section 1 of chapter 124 of the General Laws or otherwise repugnant to…”
Cavadi v. DeYeso, 941 N.E.2d 23 (Mass. 2011). “Nonstatutory actions to reach and apply are equitable actions developed by the English Courts of Chancery and, as such, fall within the general equity jurisdiction of this court and the Superior Court (G. L. c. 214, § 1) rather than *625 being creatures of statute within our…”
Custody of a Minor, 379 N.E.2d 1053 (Mass. 1978). “We conclude that these allegations fall within the scope of G. L. c. 119, § 24, and that the petitioners properly invoked the District and Superior Courts’ jurisdiction under the care and protection statute.”
Bates v. Dir. of the Off. of Campaign & Political Fin., 436 Mass. 144 (Mass. 2002). “In October, 2001, with the 2002 Massachusetts election season already under way, supporters of the clean elections law commenced an action in the county court under G. L. c. 214, § 1, against the Director of the Office of Campaign and Political Finance (director) and the…”
Warner Ins. v. Comm'r of Ins., 548 N.E.2d 188 (Mass. 1990). “212, § 4, and shares general equity jurisdiction with this court pursuant to G. L. c. 214, § 1. The Superior Court has jurisdiction over a contract dispute and, therefore, resort to the same jurisdictional principles employed by Federal decisions is not required.”
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.