Massachusetts General Laws
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 260, § 36 (2026)
Application; computation
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MAmalegislature.gov (official)
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Section 36. The provisions of law relative to limitations of actions shall apply to a counterclaim by the defendant. The time of such limitation shall be computed as if an action had been commenced therefor at the time the plaintiff's action was commenced.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the first paragraph of this section, a counterclaim arising out of the same transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the plaintiff's claim, to the extent of the plaintiff's claim, may be asserted without regard to the provisions of law relative to limitations of actions.
This section shall apply to actions brought by the commonwealth or for its benefit.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1960–2025 · leading case: Golden v. Gen. Builders Supply LLC, 807 N.E.2d 822 (Mass. 2004).
Golden v. Gen. Builders Supply LLC, 807 N.E.2d 822 (Mass. 2004). “254, §§ 5, 11, 15A; G. L. c. 260, § 36. The plaintiff owner, Sandra K.”
Arthur D. Little Int'l, Inc. v. Dooyang Corp., 928 F. Supp. 1189 (D. Mass. 1996). “See M.G.L. c. 260 § 36. In Massachusetts, “actions of tort .”
Botelho v. Citicorp Mortg., Inc. (In Re Botelho), 195 B.R. 558 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1996). “The Debtor argues that Congress “sanctioned” these holdings when it amended TILA in 1995 and provided that a consumer may rescind a transaction by way of recoupment to the extent allowed by state law.”
Bernstein v. Gramercy Mills, Inc., 452 N.E.2d 231 (Mass. App. Ct. 1983). “Gramercy next points to G. L. c. 260, § 36, inserted by St. 1973, c.”
Berezin v. Regency Sav. Bank, 234 F.3d 68 (1st Cir. 2000). “As an alternative to his theory that the promissory note is an installment contract, and as a basis for even avoiding the six-year statute of limitations period, Berezin argues that his claim is timely pursuant to Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 260, § 36 . That provision allows a defendant…”
Post v. Belmont Country Club, Inc., 805 N.E.2d 63 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004). “” We think that under the provision of G. L. c. 260, § 36 7 the filing of the counterclaim related back to the filing of the complaint, within one year of Post’s death.”
Young v. Patukonis, 506 N.E.2d 1164 (Mass. App. Ct. 1987). “822, 824 (1985); G. L. c. 260, § 36. As rent was due at the beginning of each month, there appears to be an overcharge for January 1,1984, since the property was not exempt for nineteen days.”
Fidler v. Cent. Coop. Bank (In Re Fidler), 210 B.R. 411 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1997). “On that issue, I agree with and adopt the analysis of Massachusetts law set forth in Botelho, where Judge Feeney held that claims in recoupment are subject to Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 260, § 36 . That statute provides, in relevant part: [A] counterclaim arising out of the same…”
Pahlavi v. Palandjian, 638 F. Supp. 9 (D. Mass. 1985). “In response, defendant argues, first, that his counterclaims are compulsory and under Massachusetts law may be asserted without regard to the statute of limitations.”
In Re Vinyl Tech., Inc., 352 S.W.3d 810 (Tex. App. 2011). “13(a) (compulsory counterclaims); Mass. Gen. L. ch. 260, § 36 (time for filing compulsory counterclaims).”
Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc., 326 N.E.2d 8 (Mass. 1975). “10 And with respect to the question of the statute of limitations, G. L. c. 260, § 36, inserted by St. 1973, c.”
Decota v. Stoughton, 504 N.E.2d 672 (Mass. App. Ct. 1987). “In either case, the statute of limitations as to the set-off is computed “as if an action had been commenced therefor at the time the plaintiff’s action [here the eminent domain actions] was commenced.”
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.