Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 31, § 23 (2026)

Review of examination papers; errors

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 23. Within six weeks after receipt of a request pursuant to section twenty-two, the administrator shall, subject to the provisions of this section, conduct such review, render a decision, and send a copy of such decision to the applicant. If the administrator finds that an error was made in the marking of the applicant's answer to an essay question, or in the marking of the applicant's training and experience, or in the finding that the applicant did not meet the entrance requirements for appointment to the position, the administrator shall make any necessary adjustment to correct such error.

The administrator may refuse to conduct a review pursuant to this section where the grade of the applicant in any subject of the written examination is less than fifty per cent or the applicant has failed to file the request for review within the required time or in the required form.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 23 cases, 1929–2008 · leading case: Hutcheson v. Dir. of Civil Serv., 281 N.E.2d 53 (Mass. 1972).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hutcheson v. Dir. of Civil Serv., 281 N.E.2d 53 (Mass. 1972). · cites it 26× “Klebanoff to determine whether the commissioner is compelled by G.L.c. 31, § 23, as amended, to appoint Dr.”

Anthony v. Com. of Mass., 415 F. Supp. 485 (D. Mass. 1976). · cites it 10× “§ 1983 by four female Massachusetts residents who claim they failed to receive Civil Service appointments with the Commonwealth due to the operation of the Massachusetts Veterans' Preference Statute, [1] Mass.Gen.Laws ch. 31, § 23, which they claim unconstitutionally…”

Feeney v. Com. of Mass., 451 F. Supp. 143 (D. Mass. 1978). · cites it 12× “Davis, supra , supports their previous holding that the Massachusetts Veterans' Preference statute, Mass.Gen. Laws ch. 31, § 23, deprives women of equal protection of the laws in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment in all areas of civil service employment in the Commonwealth.”

Feeney v. Commonwealth, 366 N.E.2d 1262 (Mass. 1977). · cites it 4× “Feeney received high scores on civil service examinations given in connection with the selection procedure for both positions, she was not certified for either position as a result of the operation of the Massachusetts veterans’ preference statute, G. L. c. 31, § 23. 2 In her…”

Comm'r of Metro. Dist. Comm'n v. Dir. of Civil Serv., 203 N.E.2d 95 (Mass. 1964). · cites it 2× “’ ’ 6 The later cases, like the earlier authorities, have sustained the constitutional validity of a veterans’ preference where there is (a) no legislative requirement of absolute preference and (b) reasonable legislative recognition of the principle that an appointee must be…”

Town of Milton v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 312 N.E.2d 188 (Mass. 1974). “Thus the ordinary ranking of applicants derived from their examination and then adjusted to reflect certain statutory preferences under G. L. c. 31, § 23, is altered. After the list is prepared in the ordinary way all such one-year residents are moved to the top.”

Massachusetts v. Feeney, 429 U.S. 66 (1976). “Feeney against the Massachusetts Director of Civil Service (now designated “Personnel Administrator of the Commonwealth”) and members of the Massachusetts Civil Service Commission, declaring unconstitutional the Massachusetts veterans’ preference statute, Mass. Gen. Laws c. 31,…”

Callanan v. Pers. Adm'r for the Commonwealth, 400 Mass. 597 (Mass. 1987). “The over-all pattern of the statute does not justify expectations that certain positions will become available during the period of a single list.”

Mayor of Lynn v. Comm'r of Civil Serv., 169 N.E. 502 (Mass. 1929). “They base such refusal and certification on G. L. c. 31, § 23, as amended by St. 1922, c.”

Lincoln v. Pers. Adm'r of the Dep't of Pers. Admin., 432 Mass. 208 (Mass. 2000). “” Therefore, the language of G. L. c. 31, § 24, allows the commission to dismiss petitions regarding the grading of examinations that have not first been reviewed by the personnel administrator.”

Goodale v. Cnty. Commissioners of Worcester, 178 N.E. 228 (Mass. 1931). “410, 415 , the court in referring to G. L. c. 31, § 23, as amended by St. 1922, c.”

Weiner v. City of Boston, 172 N.E.2d 96 (Mass. 1961). “In 1925 the plaintiff was recognized as a veteran for the purposes of G. L. c. 31, § 23 (veterans’ preference act), when his name was placed on the civil service eligible list from which he was appointed at the time *69 of Ms first employment by the defendant as a part-time…”

Show all 23 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.