Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 231, § 85A (2026)

Prima facie evidence of owner's responsibility for operation of motor vehicle

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 85A. In all actions to recover damages for injuries to the person or to property or for the death of a person, arising out of an accident or collision in which a motor vehicle was involved, evidence that at the time of such accident or collision it was registered in the name of the defendant as owner shall be prima facie evidence that it was then being operated by and under the control of a person for whose conduct the defendant was legally responsible, and absence of such responsibility shall be an affirmative defence to be set up in the answer and proved by the defendant.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 62 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1930–2024 · leading case: Feltch v. Gen. Rental Co., 421 N.E.2d 67 (Mass. 1981).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Feltch v. Gen. Rental Co., 421 N.E.2d 67 (Mass. 1981). · cites it 4× “was the registered owner of the truck established a prima facie case under G. L. c. 231, § 85A. They claim that General Rental Co.”

Cheek v. Econo-Car Rental Sys. of Boston, Inc., 473 N.E.2d 659 (Mass. 1985). · cites it 6× “Instead, by noting G.L.c. 231, § 85A, and by stating that the "prima facie evidence was not controverted by the defendant," the judge impliedly ruled that there was no evidence of the nonexistence of a master-servant relationship which would permit her, as the fact finder, to…”

Thompson v. Auto Credit Rehab. Corp., 775 N.E.2d 414 (Mass. App. Ct. 2002). · cites it 3× “Thompson’s claim of ACRC’s vicarious responsibility for Heikkila’s operation of its vehicle is based upon G. L. c. 231, § 85A, as added by St. 1928, c.”

Cates v. Creamer, 431 F.3d 456 (5th Cir. 2005). “2d 104, 110-11 (1969) (holding that the owner of a vehicle who was not driving at the time of the accident cannot be held vicariously liable unless there was evidence of agency); Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 231 § 85A; Harvey v.”

Motorists Com. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hartwell, 53 F.4th 730 (1st Cir. 2022). “s that language has been modified by the endorsement to eliminate the reference to garage operations, and that defendants concede the endorsement applies, whether Lynnway's 7For the same reason, defendants' invocation of a Massachusetts statutory presumption that a vehicle's…”

Peters v. Haymarket Leasing, Inc., 835 N.E.2d 628 (Mass. App. Ct. 2005). “Haymarket’s proffer eliminates any presumption of liability that may arise by operation of G. L. c. 231, § 85A. See Cheek v. Econo-Car Rental Sys.”

Covell v. Olsen, 840 N.E.2d 555 (Mass. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 7× “, that, by force of G. L. c. 231, § 85A, Erik was his mother’s agent; negligent supervision of a minor child; and negligent entrustment.”

Mitchell v. Hastings & Koch Enter., Inc., 647 N.E.2d 78 (Mass. App. Ct. 1995). “The complaint alleged two theories of liability against Ray Stone Pontiac: the agency theory, predicated on G. L. c. 231, § 85A, discussed above; and a negligent entrustment theory, for entrusting either the motorcycle or the plate, or both, to the operator.”

Commonwealth v. Pauley, 331 N.E.2d 901 (Mass. 1975). “587 (1929) (G. L. c. 231, § 85A, which made ownership of a vehicle prima facie evidence of responsibility for the conduct of the driver of the vehicle in tort actions, was a rule of evidence, not substantive law, and so could be applied retroactively to accidents antedating the…”

St. Pierre v. Penske Truck Leasing Corp., 14 Mass. L. Rptr. 149 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2001). · cites it 8× “G.L.c. 231, §85A, which provides that ownership of the motor vehicle is “prima facie evidence that it was then being operated by and under the control of a person for whose conduct the [owner of the vehicle] was legally responsible,” and 2.”

Wilson v. Grace, 173 N.E. 524 (Mass. 1930). “The case stated in this count — to recover the plaintiff’s medical expenses incurred by reason of his wife’s injuries — is not within G. L. c. 231, § 85A. In view of the construction of similar words in earlier statutes, of which the Legislature must be taken to have been…”

Lodge v. Cong. Taxi Ass'n, 165 N.E.2d 94 (Mass. 1960). “This is enough to make applicable the provisions of G. L. c. 231, § 85A, which provides that in an action such as the present action evidence that at the time of an accident or collision the motor vehicle was registered in the name of the defendant as owner shall be prima facie…”

Show all 62 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.