Mass. Gen. Laws » Part III Title IV Chapter 249
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 249, § 5 (2026)

Action in the nature of mandamus

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

Section 5. A civil action to obtain relief formerly available by writ of mandamus may be brought in the supreme judicial or superior court or, if the matter involves any right, title or interest in land, or arises under or involves the subdivision control law, the zoning act, or municipal zoning, or subdivision ordinances, by–laws or regulations, in the land court.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 117 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1922–2026 · leading case: Doe, SORB No. 76819 v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 102 N.E.3d 950 (Mass. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Doe, SORB No. 76819 v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 102 N.E.3d 950 (Mass. 2018). · cites it 4× “211, § 3, as well as for mandamus under G. L. c. 249, § 5, both in their opposition to the board's motion to dismiss and in their brief to the full court.”
Boston Med. Ctr. Corp. v. Sec'y of the Exec. Off. of Health & Human Servs., 463 Mass. 447 (Mass. 2012). · cites it 2× “The judge was correct to deny this review where the Secretary was exercising her regulatory power granted by the statute, and the rate setting process bore none of the indicia of judicial or quasi judicial decision-making.”
Simmons v. Clerk-Magistrate of the Boston Div. of the Hous. Court Dep't, 448 Mass. 57 (Mass. 2006). · cites it 2× “The plaintiffs, tenants in public housing owned and operated by the Boston Housing Authority (BHA), filed a complaint seeking relief in the nature of mandamus, pursuant to G. L. c. 249, § 5, in the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County, challenging the practice of the…”
Sirva Relocation, LLC v. Golar Richie, 794 F.3d 185 (1st Cir. 2015). “See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 249, § 5 ; see also Town of Reading v.”
Dutil v. Murphy, 550 F.3d 154 (1st Cir. 2008). “Alternatively, a petitioner who suffers a significant delay in receiving a hearing may have an as-applied due process challenge to the statute, as such a delay could conceivably stress the petitioner’s right to avoid incarceration past the point of his or her dangerousness. We…”
Roslindale Motor Sales, Inc. v. Police Commr. of Boston, 538 N.E.2d 312 (Mass. 1989). · cites it 2× “140, § 59, provides for an appeal to the Superior Court, Roslindale filed a complaint in the nature of mandamus, see G. L. c. 249, § 5 (1986 ed.), asking that the commissioner be ordered to issue an application for renewal of its license and to act promptly on receipt of…”
Delapa v. Conservation Comm'n of Falmouth, 108 N.E.3d 474 (Mass. App. Ct. 2018). “G. L. c. 249, § 5. At oral argument, the commission asserted that docks that were built without commission approval should not be considered "existing" docks even if they were built long before the applicable regulations were adopted.”
Doe v. Dist. Attorney for the Plymouth Dist., 564 N.E.2d 588 (Mass. App. Ct. 1991). · cites it 2× “They brought an action in the nature of mandamus (see G. L. c. 249, § 5, and Mass.R.Civ.P. 81(b), 365 Mass.”
Molly A. v. Comm'r of the Dep't of Mental Retardation, 867 N.E.2d 350 (Mass. App. Ct. 2007). “Given the EOHHS’s apparent unwillingness to act on the parents’ administrative appeal of the revised ITP, the appropriate vehicle for the parents’ grievance should presumably have been an action in the nature of mandamus, pursuant to G. L. c. 249, § 5, to require the EOHHS to…”
Indeck Maine Energy, LLC v. Comm'r of Energy Resources, 911 N.E.2d 149 (Mass. 2009). “231A (declaratory judgment) nor G. L. c. 249, § 5 (mandamus), provides an independent statutory basis for standing.”
Town of Boxford v. Massachusetts High. Dep't, 940 N.E.2d 404 (Mass. 2010). “10 Finally, in count IV, the town seeks mandamus relief pursuant to G. L. c. 249, § 5, 11 requiring the DEP to institute an enforcement action against the highway department for violations of G.”
Doherty v. Ret. Bd. of Medford, 680 N.E.2d 45 (Mass. 1997). “249, § 4 (certiorari), appears to be significantly less exhaustive than that standard under G. L. c. 249, § 5 (mandamus).” The Superior Court judge was correct in “ordering] an amendment of the pleadings from a writ of mandamus to a writ of certiorari, in the interest of justice.”
Show all 117 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.