Mass. Gen. Laws » Part III Title I Chapter 220
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 220, § 2 (2026)

General powers

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

Section 2. The courts of the commonwealth and the justices thereof shall have and exercise all the powers necessary for the performance of their duties. They may issue all writs, warrants and processes and make and award judgments, decrees, orders and injunctions necessary or proper to carry into effect the powers granted to them, and, if no form for such writ or process is prescribed by statute, they shall frame one in conformity with the principles of law and the usual course of proceedings in the courts of the commonwealth.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1971–1996 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Beneficial Fin. Co., 275 N.E.2d 33 (Mass. 1971).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Commonwealth v. Beneficial Fin. Co., 275 N.E.2d 33 (Mass. 1971). · cites it 2× “253, wherein we deal with the corporate defendants’responsibility for the acts of their agents in this Commonwealth in furtherance of the conspiracy and discuss the corporate network of the several defendants to the extent that it is relevant.”
Dist. Attorney for the Plymouth Dist. v. New England Tel. & Tel. Co., 399 N.E.2d 866 (Mass. 1980). · cites it 2× “276, § 1, and G.L.c. 220, § 2, because we conclude that § 99 supports the entry of an order concerning the cross frame unit-trap in this case.”
Police Comm'r v. Mun. Court of Dorchester Dist., 374 N.E.2d 272 (Mass. 1978). “, ante 569, 572-573 (1978); G. L. c. 220, §2. 16 The judicial power we assert here is based on our view of the ancillary jurisdiction of the courts and not on any view of constitutional matters, an issue we do not reach, as it is not raised on this record.”
Baird v. Attorney Gen., 360 N.E.2d 288 (Mass. 1977). “If the mere existence of the “burden” of seeking judicial consent to an abortion is not unconstitutionally onerous (and apparently these plaintiffs have not yet so claimed in the District Court), the circumstances that an indigent minor may have counsel ap *763 pointed for her…”
Commonwealth v. Penta, 669 N.E.2d 767 (Mass. 1996). “7 ; G. L. c. 220, § 2 8 ; and Commonwealth v.”
M. C. v. Comm'r of Corr., 507 N.E.2d 253 (Mass. 1987). “Nor does G. L. c. 220, § 2 (1984 ed.), entitle the plaintiff to costs or attorney’s fees.”
New England Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Dist. Attorney for Norfolk Dist., 373 N.E.2d 960 (Mass. 1978). “272, § 99 D 1 d, exempting from criminal liability “any person” duly authorized to make specified interceptions, and § 99 Q 3, making good faith reliance on a warrant a “complete defense” to the civil remedy provided against “any person” who intercepts.”
New England Tel. & Tel. v. Attorney for Norfolk Dist., 373 N.E.2d 960 (Mass. 1978). “272, § 99 D 1 d, exempting from criminal liability "any person" duly authorized to make specified interceptions, and § 99 Q 3, making good faith reliance on a warrant a "complete defense" to the civil remedy provided against "any person" who intercepts.”
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.