Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 231A, § 1 (2026)

Power to make declaratory determination; jury questions

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 1. The supreme judicial court, the superior court, the land court and the probate courts, within their respective jurisdictions, may on appropriate proceedings make binding declarations of right, duty, status and other legal relations sought thereby, either before or after a breach or violation thereof has occurred in any case in which an actual controversy has arisen and is specifically set forth in the pleadings and whether any consequential judgment or relief is or could be claimed at law or in equity or not; and such proceeding shall not be open to objection on the ground that a merely declaratory judgment or decree is sought thereby and such declaration, when made, shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree and be reviewable as such; provided, that nothing contained herein shall be construed to authorize the change, extension or alteration of the law regulating the method of obtaining service on, or jurisdiction over, parties or affect their right to trial by jury. When a declaration of right, or the granting of further relief based thereon, shall involve the determination of issues of fact triable by a jury as of right and as to which a jury trial is duly claimed by the party entitled thereto, or issues which the court, in accordance with the practice of courts of equity, considers should be tried by a jury, such issues may be submitted to a jury in the form of questions, with proper instructions by the court, whether a general verdict be required or not.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 256 cases (47 in the last 5 years), 1958–2026 · leading case: Buffalo-Water 1, LLC v. Fid. Real Est. Co., LLC, 111 N.E.3d 266 (Mass. 2018).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Buffalo-Water 1, LLC v. Fid. Real Est. Co., LLC, 111 N.E.3d 266 (Mass. 2018). · cites it 2× “Buffalo-Water contends that the judge erred in dismissing its claim for declaratory relief under *272 G. L. c. 231A, § 1, because, where the claim was properly brought, Buffalo-Water is entitled to a declaration of the rights of the parties.”

Konstantopoulos v. Town of Whately, 424 N.E.2d 210 (Mass. 1981). · cites it 3× “Similarly, G. L. c. 231A, § 1, authorizing courts, including the Probate Courts, to grant declaratory relief, does not expand the jurisdiction of the courts upon which it confers power to render declaratory decrees.”

Comm. for Pub. Couns. Servs. v. Attorney Gen., 108 N.E.3d 966 (Mass. 2018). · cites it 2× “211, § 3, and **703 G. L. c. 231A, § 1, claiming that the misconduct by the district attorneys and members of the Attorney General's office required the imposition of a "global remedy.”

Johnson Prods., Inc. v. City Council of Medford, 233 N.E.2d 316 (Mass. 1968). · cites it 4× “On the same day it filed a bill for declaratory relief against the city and the council under G. L. c. 231A, § 1. In each case the result was adverse to Johnson.”

Dep't of Cmty. Affairs v. Massachusetts State Coll. Bldg. Auth., 392 N.E.2d 1006 (Mass. 1979). · cites it 2× “214, § 2; G. L. c. 231A, § 1. We conclude that the Authority is subject to the provisions of the Act.”

Purity Supreme, Inc. v. Attorney Gen., 407 N.E.2d 297 (Mass. 1980). “Source of Attorney General’s power. The Attorney General’s power to seek injunctive relief derives from G.”

Maher v. Hyde, 272 F.3d 83 (1st Cir. 2001). “They requested a declaration that the Board lacked the authority to let Hyde and AT & T withdraw without prejudice and then refile their (denied) applications, pursuant to Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 231A, § 1 (authorizing courts to *86 make “binding declarations of right, duty, status…”

First Nat'l Bank of Boston v. Attorney Gen., 359 N.E.2d 1262 (Mass. 1977). · cites it 2× “(b) The defendants also claim that, because the Attorney General has indicated that he will not prosecute the plaintiffs for distributing “in-house” newspapers to employees or communications to stockholders that advocate their position on the GIT, there is no actual controversy…”

Noe, SORB No. 5340 v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 102 N.E.3d 409 (Mass. 2018). “While that motion was pending, Noe amended his complaint to include claims for declaratory relief under G. L. c. 231A, § 1, challenging the board's procedures for failing to provide a right to counsel in the reclassification hearing and placing the burden of proof in…”

Consol. Cigar Corp. v. Dep't of Pub. Health, 364 N.E.2d 1202 (Mass. 1977). “G. L. c. 231A, § 1. See Attorney Gen. v. Kenco Optics, Inc.”

Grocery Mfrs. of Am., Inc. v. Dep't of Pub. Health, 393 N.E.2d 881 (Mass. 1979). “In this facial attack on the regulation we do not have an actual controversy, as required for the issuance of a declaratory judgment (G. L. c. 231A, § 1), concerning the conflict of the regulation with specific statutes.”

Sch. Comm. of Greenfield v. Greenfield Educ. Ass'n, 431 N.E.2d 180 (Mass. 1982). “” This action was brought for declaratory and injunctive relief under G. L. c. 231A, §§ 1,5. Section 1 authorizes the Superior Court to “make binding declarations of right .”

Show all 256 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.