Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 38, § 6 (2026)

Unmarked human remains; notice to office of chief medical examiner; reasonable attempt to identify; notification of commission on Indian affairs when remains suspected to be 100 years old or more

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 6. (a) It shall be the duty of a person who discovers unmarked human remains, or who knowingly causes human remains to be disturbed through construction or agricultural activity, to immediately notify the office of the chief medical examiner.

(b) The medical examiner shall make reasonable attempts to promptly identify unmarked human remains including, but not limited to, obtaining: (i) photographs of the human remains prior to an autopsy; (ii) dental or skeletal X-rays; (iii) photographs of items found with the human remains; (iv) fingerprints from the remains, if possible; and (v) a sample of bone, hair or tissue for DNA testing.

(c) The office shall conduct an inquiry to determine whether the remains are suspected of being 100 years old or more and, if so determined, shall immediately notify the state archaeologist. The state archaeologist shall determine if the skeletal remains are Native American. If the remains are deemed likely to be Native American, the state archaeologist shall immediately notify the commission on Indian affairs which shall cause a site evaluation to be made to determine if the place where the remains were found is a Native American burial site.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1973–2002 · leading case: Globe Newspaper Co. v. Chief Med. Exam'r, 533 N.E.2d 1356 (Mass. 1989).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Globe Newspaper Co. v. Chief Med. Exam'r, 533 N.E.2d 1356 (Mass. 1989). · cites it 5× “The judge allowed the motion and an amended judgment was entered declaring the autopsy reports of the three patients to be public records, that they be disclosed to the plaintiff, and that reports of all autopsies “conducted pursuant to Mass.”

Commonwealth v. Boucher, 780 N.E.2d 47 (Mass. 2002). “23D, *280 § 13 (any business may seek financing from economic stabilization trust if, among other requirements, “the business is likely to experience a large loss of employment, plant closure, or failure without the loan financing or investment by the trust” [emphasis added]);…”

Tyree v. Keane, 507 N.E.2d 742 (Mass. 1987). · cites it 3× “7 of the rules and regulations for the governing of the State police and declined to take judicial notice of G. L. c. 38, § 6, which at the time of the alleged unconstitutional search provided that “[t]he district attorney or his representative upon receipt of notification shall…”

Commonwealth v. Nassar, 406 N.E.2d 1286 (Mass. 1980). “425 (1945), a case involving G. L. c. 38, § 6, which provided that “ [mjedical examiners shall make examination upon the view of the dead bodies of only such persons as are supposed to have died by violence,” we observed that “ [djeath ‘by violence’ comprehends death from other…”

Commonwealth v. Bjorkman, 303 N.E.2d 715 (Mass. 1973). “G. L. c. 38, § 6. Gahn v. Leary, 318 Mass.”

Commonwealth v. Lo, 1 Mass. L. Rptr. 186 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1993). “38, §6 provides: “The District Attorney and his law enforcement representative, upon receipt of notification of the death, shall thereafter be the authority to direct and control the criminal investigation of the death and shall coordinate the criminal investigation with the…”

In re Inquest into the Death of Walton, 4 Mass. L. Rptr. 653 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1995). “Therefore, the court requests that the parties asserting privilege submit materials which would indicate how the exhibits should be either redacted or withheld.”

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.