Massachusetts General Laws
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 214, § 9 (2026)
Acts and proceedings other than trials upon the merits
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MAmalegislature.gov (official)
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Section 9. All acts and proceedings in civil actions other than trials upon the merits, wherever they may be conducted, shall be considered as taking place in court and not in chambers.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1923–1997 · leading case: Nickerson v. Dowd, 174 N.E.2d 346 (Mass. 1961).
Nickerson v. Dowd, 174 N.E.2d 346 (Mass. 1961). “They urge that it was issued contrary to G. L. c. 214, § 9, as amended by St. 1935, c.”
Hansen v. Commonwealth, 181 N.E.2d 843 (Mass. 1962). “214, § 9A, were errors of law, and that the single judge had no jurisdiction to issue a temporary restraining order under G. L. c. 214, § 9. Since, the petitioners contend, the order was issued by a court without jurisdiction, it is a void order for violation of which no one can…”
Wireless Specialty Apparatus Co. v. Priess, 246 Mass. 274 (Mass. 1923). “It is assumed in favor of the defendant, without pausing to discuss or decide the point, that the restraining order expired on November 3, 1922, under G. L. c. 214, § 9. The purpose of this proceeding for contempt is to maintain the authority of the court.”
Gallison v. Downing, 244 Mass. 33 (Mass. 1923). “G. L. c. 214, § 9. It meant no more than that the court thought that there was a prima facie appearance of ground to support the contentions of the plaintiff, and that in the exercise of judicial discretion the brief restraint upon the defendant in the exercise of the rights…”
Stathopoulos v. Reeksting, 252 Mass. 542 (Mass. 1925). “The order of November 30, 1923, was merely a temporary restraining order (G. L. c. 214, § 9) which would have terminated of its own force on December 6, 1923, but for the order extending the injunction until further order of the court.”
Stephen v. MacKinnon, 7 Mass. L. Rptr. 241 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1997). “She also claims the search violated her privacy rights under G.L.c. 214, §9(b) and 103 C.M.R. 483 because there was no reasonable suspicion for the search.”
Krohn-Hite Corp. v. Berube, 372 F. Supp. 1262 (D. Mass. 1974). “G.L. c. 214, § 9 provides that No temporary restraining order shall be granted without notice to the opposite party, unless it shall clearly appear from specific facts, shown by affidavit or by the verified bill, that immediate and irreparable loss or damage will result to the…”
Town of Auburn v. E. J. Cross Co., 295 N.E.2d 393 (Mass. App. Ct. 1973). “It is not alleged that the court took any action to continue the restraining order in force beyond the ten-day period set out in G. L. c. 214, §9 (as most recently amended by St.”
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 214, § 9(b) — 1 case
Stephen v. MacKinnon, 7 Mass. L. Rptr. 241 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1997). “She also claims the search violated her privacy rights under G.L.c. 214, §9(b) and 103 C.M.R. 483 because there was no reasonable suspicion for the search.”
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.