Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 231, § 51 (2026)

Amendments as to parties, process or pleading

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 51. In all civil proceedings, the court may at any time, allow amendments adding a party, discontinuing as to a party or changing the form of the action, and may allow any other amendment in matter of form or substance in any process, pleading or proceeding, which may enable the plaintiff to sustain the action for the cause or for recovery for the injury for which the action was intended to be brought, or enable the defendant to make a legal defense. Any amendment allowed pursuant to this section or pursuant to the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure shall relate to the original pleading.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 121 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1922–2026 · leading case: Palacio v. City of Springfield, 25 F. Supp. 3d 163 (D. Mass. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Palacio v. City of Springfield, 25 F. Supp. 3d 163 (D. Mass. 2014). · cites it 4× “1 Given these agreements, the City and Fitchet must per force acknowledge that the law of the Commonwealth further provides that “[a]ny amendment allowed pursuant to [Mass. Gen. Laws c. 231, § 51] or pursuant to the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure shall relate to the…”

Berman v. Linnane, 434 Mass. 301 (Mass. 2001). “See G. L. c. 231, § 51. See also Strout v. United Shoe Mach.”

Bengar v. Clark Equip. Co., 517 N.E.2d 1286 (Mass. 1988). · cites it 2× “425, 428 (1932), interpreting G. L. c. 231 §§ 51, 138; Guarino v. Russo, 215 Mass.”

Christopher v. Duffy, 556 N.E.2d 121 (Mass. App. Ct. 1990). · cites it 3× “762 (1974), together with the 1988 revision of G. L. c. 231, § 51, by St. 1988, c. 141, § 1, means that an amendment such as that proposed here — adding a party, sounding a new theory of liability, but claiming a remedy for the injury first sued on — should be allowed with…”

Covel v. Safetech, Inc., 90 F.R.D. 427 (D. Mass. 1981). · cites it 3× “15(c), effective July 1, 1974, which provides: Whenever the claim or defense asserted in the amended pleading arose out of the conduct, transaction, or occurrence set forth or attempted to be set forth in the original pleading, the amendment (including an amendment changing a…”

Herrick v. Essex Reg'l Ret. Bd., 861 N.E.2d 32 (Mass. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to G. L. c. 231, § 51, inserted by St. 1988, c.”

Sch. Comm. of Springfield v. Bd. of Educ., 287 N.E.2d 438 (Mass. 1972). · cites it 2× “See G. L. c. 231, § 51. 27 See also Reading v.”

Wood v. Jaeger-Sykes, Inc., 536 N.E.2d 1100 (Mass. App. Ct. 1989). · cites it 3× “141, § 1, substituting a new G. L. c. 231, § 51, for an earlier version.”

Afarian v. Massachusetts Elec. Co., 449 Mass. 257 (Mass. 2007). “” 16 Demoulas filed a limited appearance to oppose the motion, and was represented by the same counsel who represented Market Basket. As the named defendants had filed answers to the first amended complaint, it fell within a judge’s discretion to allow or to deny the plaintiffs’…”

Narragansett Amusement Co. v. Riverside Park Amusement Co., 157 N.E. 532 (Mass. 1927). · cites it 2× “173, § 48, now G. L. c. 231, § 51. “Many cases have arisen where an amendment to a declaration has been allowed after verdict in order to make the statement of the cause of action conform to the evidence and thus to avoid a variance between the allegations and the proof without…”

Arsenault v. Bhattacharya, 55 N.E.3d 972 (Mass. App. Ct. 2016). · cites it 2× “See G. L. c. 231, § 51, as appearing in St. 1988, c.”

Casco v. Warley Elec. Co., 643 N.E.2d 466 (Mass. App. Ct. 1994). · cites it 4× “L. c. 231, § 51, on which Casco relies, provides: “In all civil proceedings, the court may at any time, allow amendments adding a party, discontinuing as to a party or changing the form of the action, and may allow *703 any other amendment in matter of form or substance in any…”

Show all 121 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.