Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 30, § 39J (2026)

Public construction contracts; effect of decisions of contracting body or administrative board

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 39J. Notwithstanding any contrary provision of any contract for the construction, reconstruction, alteration, remodeling, repair or demolition of any public building or public works by the commonwealth, or by any county, city, town, district, board, commission or other public body, when the amount of the contract is more than five thousand dollars in the case of the commonwealth and more than two thousand dollars in the case of any county, city, town, district, board, commission or other public body, a decision, by the contracting body or by any administrative board, official or agency, or by any architect or engineer, on a dispute, whether of fact or of law, arising under said contract shall not be final or conclusive if such decision is made in bad faith, fraudulently, capriciously, or arbitrarily is unsupported by substantial evidence, or is based upon error of law.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases, 1965–2013 · leading case: J. A. Sullivan Corp. v. Commonwealth, 494 N.E.2d 374 (Mass. 1986).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

J. A. Sullivan Corp. v. Commonwealth, 494 N.E.2d 374 (Mass. 1986). · cites it 2× “” According to the Commonwealth’s argument, the architect was empowered to reject the plaintiff’s request for additional expenses for ledge removal (and he did) and under G. L. c. 30, § 39J, 5 the architect’s decision, not having been made in bad faith or in a fraudulent,…”

Massachusetts High. Dep't v. Perini Corp., 981 N.E.2d 721 (Mass. App. Ct. 2013). · cites it 2× “The project director’s decisions could be appealed to the board of commissioners of the Massachusetts Highway Department or to the Superior Court, pursuant to G. L. c. 30, § 39J. As work on the project progressed, hundreds of disputes arose involving additional costs incurred by…”

Acmat Corp. v. Daniel O'connell's Sons, Inc., 455 N.E.2d 652 (Mass. App. Ct. 1983). “G. L. c. 30, § 39J. Compare Hurley v. Boston, 244 Mass.”

Fontaine Bros., Inc. v. Springfield, 617 N.E.2d 1002 (Mass. App. Ct. 1993). “Although the words “final” and “binding” have a terminal and unconditional quality, the power of the architect on a construction job is, of course, not without limit.”

J.J. Finn Elec. Serv., Inc. v. P & H Gen. Contractors, Inc., 432 N.E.2d 116 (Mass. App. Ct. 1982). “of the several kinds of work to be done under [the] contract, and [to] decide all questions ... as to the interpretation of the .”

A. Bonfatti & Co. v. Town of Rockport, 429 N.E.2d 75 (Mass. App. Ct. 1981). “” G. L. c. 30, § 39J, inserted by St. 1961, c.”

Peabody N.E., Inc. v. Town of Marshfield, 4 Mass. L. Rptr. 413 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1995). · cites it 2× “00 and, subject to further modification by the Master, Conclusion 31 is to be amended to refer to M.G.L.c. 30, §39J. C. CHAPTER 93A In Findings 448 and 449 and Conclusion 47, the Master found that certain actions on the part of Marshfield and/or Metcalf & Eddy were made in bad…”

John J. Petruzzi-William E. Forrester, Inc. v. Massachusetts Tpk. Auth., 9 Mass. L. Rptr. 184 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1998). · cites it 10× “The MTA now moves for summary judgment on the grounds that Petruzzi-Foixester is liable under the contract for any cost incurred for time lost due to bad weather, that Petruzzi-Forrester is precluded from disputing its other claims because it failed to follow the required claim…”

Hampden Cornice Works, Inc. v. Leo Spear Constr. Co., 206 N.E.2d 83 (Mass. 1965). “The dispute was whether open balcony floors or porch floors could be regarded *799 as roofs and includable in the obligation of Hampden under its subcontract. The judge found no support in fact or law for the contention that the decision made by the chairman of the State Housing…”

Ostrow Elec. Co. v. J.L. Marshall & Sons, Inc., 798 N.E.2d 310 (Mass. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 2× “See G. L. c. 30, § 39J. As to the terms of addendum 7, Ostrow submitted an affidavit referencing addendum 7’s exclusion of “outlet boxes” from work to be done by the audiovisual subcontractor, and averred, “I knew from my experience and the Mass.”

Zeraschi & Son, Inc. v. R.W. Granger & Sons, Inc., 13 Mass. L. Rptr. 187 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2001). “As a threshold issue, the DCPO argues that language contained in the DCPO’s “Notice to Contractors” coupled with G.L.c. 30, §39J 4 empowered the architect to order Zeraschi to perform the lead coated copper flashing, and that the decision, not having been made in bad faith or in…”

CCM Corp. v. Massachusetts Tpk. Auth., 5 Mass. L. Rptr. 58 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1996). “Pursuant to M.G.L.c. 30, §39J, the decisions of an engineer so designated are final and conclusive unless such decision was “made in bad faith, fraudulently, capriciously, or arbitrarily, or is unsupported by substantial evidence, or is based upon error of law.”

Show all 13 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.