Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 223A, § 5 (2026)

Forum non conveniens

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 5. When the court finds that in the interest of substantial justice the action should be heard in another forum, the court may stay or dismiss the action in whole or in part on any conditions that may be just.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 47 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1978–2023 · leading case: Oxford Global Res., LLC v. Hernandez, 106 N.E.3d 556 (Mass. 2018).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Oxford Global Res., LLC v. Hernandez, 106 N.E.3d 556 (Mass. 2018). · cites it 2× “" G. L. c. 223A, § 5. A court evaluating a motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens will look to whether "there is an alternative forum in which justice may be had, and if the balance of private and public concerns strongly favor the defendant's motion.”

Good Hope Indus., Inc. v. Ryder Scott Co., 389 N.E.2d 76 (Mass. 1979). · cites it 2× “*13 We wish to make clear, however, that we do not reach the merits of a motion to dismiss on the basis of forum non conveniens, pursuant to G. L. c. 223A, § 5, 19 as that question is not properly before us.”

Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Attorney Gen., 94 N.E.3d 786 (Mass. 2018). “14 The judge also determined that "the interests of substantial justice dictate that the matter be heard in Massachusetts," citing G. L. c. 223A, § 5. Exxon has not argued that it would be unfairly prejudiced by having to litigate in Massachusetts, and thus has not moved to…”

W.R. Grace & Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co., 555 N.E.2d 214 (Mass. 1990). · cites it 2× “" G.L.c. 223A, § 5 (1988 ed.). "When the court finds that in the interest of substantial justice the action should be heard in another forum, the court may stay or dismiss the action in whole or in part on any conditions that may be just.”

Tatro v. Manor Care, Inc., 625 N.E.2d 549 (Mass. 1994). “See G. L. c. 223A, § 5 (1992 ed.). “Consideration of a motion [to dismiss] based on forum non conveniens involves a decision to decline jurisdiction which is constitutionally permissible when another State is better situated to deal with the matter.”

Green v. Manhattanville Coll., 661 N.E.2d 123 (Mass. App. Ct. 1996). · cites it 3× “223A, it follows that in our review of the judge’s decision we look to G. L. c. 223A, § 5, the legislative formulation of the doctrine of forum non conveniens contained within our long-arm statute.”

Diamond Grp., Inc. v. Selective Distrib. Int'l, Inc., 998 N.E.2d 1018 (Mass. App. Ct. 2013). · cites it 2× “Under G. L. c. 223A, § 5, “[wjhen the court finds that in the interest of substantial justice the action should be heard in another forum, the court may stay or dismiss the action in whole or in part on any conditions that may be just.”

Carlson Corp. v. Univ. of Vermont, 402 N.E.2d 483 (Mass. 1980). “See G. L. c. 223A, § 5. Consideration of a motion based on forum non conveniens involves a decision to decline jurisdiction which is constitutionally permissible when another State is better situated to deal with the matter.”

Von SCHönau-Riedweg v. Rothschild Bank AG, 128 N.E.3d 96 (Mass. App. Ct. 2019). “Rothschild urges us to affirm on one of three alternative arguments, based on (i) forum selection clauses found in various documents governing von Schönau's accounts, (ii) forum non conveniens, see G. L. c. 223A, § 5, and (iii) principles of international comity.”

M.K. v. D.B., 102 Mass. App. Ct. 183 (Mass. App. Ct. 2023). · cites it 3× “See G. L. c. 223A, § 5. In reaching that conclusion, the judge relied in part on the fact that the husband faced criminal charges for the alleged Martha's Vineyard rape.”

Kedy v. A.W. Chesterton Co., 946 A.2d 1171 (R.I. 2008). “§ 6-104(a) (2006); Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 223A, § 5 (West 2000); Miss.”

Gianocostas v. Interface Grp.-Massachusetts, Inc., 450 Mass. 715 (Mass. 2008). “See G. L. c. 223A, § 5, inserted by St. 1968, c.”

Show all 47 citing cases →

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.