Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 251, § 7 (2026)

Witnesses; production of documents and things; entry on land for inspection

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

Section 7. (a) The arbitrators may cause to be issued subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and for the production of books, records, documents and other evidence, and shall have the power to administer oaths. Subpoenas so issued shall be served, and upon application to the court by a party or the arbitrators, enforced, in the manner provided by law for the service and enforcement of subpoenas in a civil action.

(b) On application of a party and for use as evidence, the arbitrators may permit a deposition to be taken, in the manner and upon the terms designated by the arbitrators, of a witness who cannot be subpoenaed or is unable to attend the hearing.

(c) All provisions of law compelling a person under subpoena to testify are applicable.

(d) Fees for attendance as a witness shall be the same as for a witness in the superior court.

(e) Any party in an arbitration proceeding may serve upon any other party a request for the production of documents and things and for entry upon land for inspection and other purpose as permitted by and in accordance with the procedure set forth in rule thirty-four of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure in effect at the time the request is made. The enforcement and objections of such request shall be made to the arbitrators and the arbitrators only shall issue such orders as they deem necessary on objections and on requests for enforcement of production both prior to and after the commencement of the hearing.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1989–2012 · leading case: Superadio Ltd. P'ship v. Winstar Radio Prods., LLC, 844 N.E.2d 246 (Mass. 2006).
Superadio Ltd. P'ship v. Winstar Radio Prods., LLC, 844 N.E.2d 246 (Mass. 2006). · cites it 3× “However, the power to enforce a discovery order is limited under G. L. c. 251, § 7 (e), to application to a judge for enforcement of a subpoena.”
Hull Mun. Lighting Plant v. Massachusetts Mun. Wholesale Elec. Co., 609 N.E.2d 460 (Mass. 1993). · cites it 2× “See G. L. c. 251, § 7 (e). 7 Generally, discovery is permissible of any nonprivileged material which is relevant to the pending action and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.”
Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Faris, 536 N.E.2d 1097 (Mass. App. Ct. 1989). “251, § 7, to subpoena witnesses and documents, would be competent to resolve the factual issues involved in the claim for underinsurance benefits under the Aetna policy: whether James Faris was negligent and, if so, *197 whether that negligence was a proximate cause of the…”
Bay State Gas Co. v. Local No. 273, Util. Workers Union of Am., 611 N.E.2d 249 (Mass. 1993). “3 In sharp contrast, the Legislature, just one year later, enacted G. L. c. 251, § 7 (a), as appearing in St.”
FusionStorm, Inc. v. Presidio Networked Solutions, Inc., 871 F. Supp. 2d 1345 (M.D. Fla. 2012). “…Act, which addresses discovery relating to arbitration and provides that an arbitrator may permit discovery. See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 251, § 7 .”
Dat Nguyen v. Pilgrim Ins., 21 Mass. L. Rptr. 626 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2006). · cites it 2× “However, there is no provision under G.L.c. 251, §7 for issuance of interrogatories by any party.”
Hiltz v. Whited, 2008 Mass. App. Div. 245 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 2008). · cites it 2× “Further, with respect to the medical records obtained by the defendant through the plaintiffs authorization, the plaintiff could have obtained copies of the records pursuant to G.L.c. 251, §7 (e) by serving the defendant with a request for the production of documents and by…”
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 251, § 7(e) — 1 case
Dat Nguyen v. Pilgrim Ins., 21 Mass. L. Rptr. 626 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2006). “However, there is no provision under G.L.c. 251, §7 for issuance of interrogatories by any party.”
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.