Mass. Gen. Laws » Part III Title II Chapter 223
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 223, § 79 (2026)

Holder of encumbrance; summoning; examination

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

Section 79. Personal property upon which a mortgage or lien is claimed, or which is claimed to have been sold under a contract of conditional sale reserving title in the vendor, may be attached as if unencumbered; and the mortgagee, pledgee, lienor or conditional vendor, or his assigns, may be summoned in the same action in which the property is attached as the trustee of the mortgagor, pledgor, lienee or conditional vendee, or his assigns, to answer such questions as may be put to him by the court or by its order relative to the consideration of the alleged mortgage, pledge, lien or contract of conditional sale, and the amount due thereon.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1925–1953 · leading case: Shapiro v. Park Trust Co., 149 N.E. 313 (Mass. 1925).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Shapiro v. Park Trust Co., 149 N.E. 313 (Mass. 1925). · cites it 2× “” The facts in that action were within the terms of G. L. c. 223, § 79. The lumber covered by the mortgages was in the actual possession of the mortgagor, who was the defendant in that action, and the mortgagee, the present defendant, was summoned as trustee in the usual way.”
Jamnback v. Aamunkoitto Temperance Soc'y, Inc., 172 N.E. 884 (Mass. 1930). · cites it 2× “There was no evidence of any breach of the conditions of the mortgage or that the mortgagees were in possession of the property. The finding that it was on the premises of the mortgagor must stand.”
Samuels v. Charles E. Fogg Co., 155 N.E. 429 (Mass. 1927). “The judge was in error in deciding that the mortgage prevented creditors from attaching the mortgaged property.”
Banca Italiana Di Sconto v. Columbia Counter Co., 151 N.E. 114 (Mass. 1926). · cites it 5× “148, which has been reenacted without material change into G. L. c. 223, §§ 79, 80, 81. Regarding St.”
Joseph P. Manning Co. v. Kemppainen, 173 N.E. 532 (Mass. 1930). “The judge of the trial *300 court found “ that this action was properly brought under the provisions of G. L. c. 223, § 79.” We must assume that the personal property of the Trio Company when attached was in the possession of the defendant or defendants.”
Hamilton Fin. Corp. v. Egyptian Chem. Co., 6 Mass. App. Dec. 49 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1953). “The plaintiff bases its grievance on the claim that it has the sole right, under G. L. c. 223, §§ 79, 80 and 81 to determine how and when the issue of the validity of the mortgage shall be determined.”
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.