Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 40, § 14 (2026)

Purchase of land; conditions; limitations; definition

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 14. The aldermen of any city, except Boston, or the selectmen of a town may purchase, or take by eminent domain under chapter seventy-nine, any land, easement or right therein within the city or town not already appropriated to public use, for any municipal purpose for which the purchase or taking of land, easement or right therein is not otherwise authorized or directed by statute; but no land, easement or right therein shall be taken or purchased under this section unless the taking or purchase thereof has previously been authorized by the city council or by vote of the town, nor until an appropriation of money, to be raised by loan or otherwise, has been made for the purpose by a two thirds vote of the city council or by a two thirds vote of the town, and no lot of land shall be purchased for any municipal purpose by any city subject to this section for a price more than twenty-five per cent in excess of its average assessed valuation during the previous three years.

The words ''municipal purpose'', as used in this section, shall include any such land, easement or right therein within the city or town, so purchased or taken by eminent domain for the purpose of conveying or granting the same to the commonwealth for the use of a regional community college.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 27 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1923–2022 · leading case: Byfield v. City of Newton, 141 N.E. 658 (Mass. 1923).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Byfield v. City of Newton, 141 N.E. 658 (Mass. 1923). · cites it 5× “G. L. c. 40, § 14. Reed v. Acton, 117 Mass.”

Chandler v. Cnty. Commissioners, 437 Mass. 430 (Mass. 2002). “” G. L. c. 40, § 14. See, e.g., Walker v. Medford, 272 Mass.”

Breckwood Real Est. Co. v. City of Springfield, 154 N.E. 552 (Mass. 1927). · cites it 4× “G. L. c. 40, § 14, as amended by St. 1921, c.”

Walker v. City of Medford, 172 N.E. 248 (Mass. 1930). · cites it 3× “G. L. c. 40, § 14, as amended by St. 1921, c.”

Blakeley v. Gorin, 313 N.E.2d 903 (Mass. 1974). · cites it 2× “See also the following statutes delegating this power to governmental subdivisions: G.L.c. 40, § 14, to cities and towns; G.L.”

Smith v. New England Aircraft Co., 170 N.E. 385 (Mass. 1930). “The act of Congress and the statutes of this Commonwealth by plain implication, if not by express terms, not only recognize the existence of air navigation but authorize the flying of aircraft over privately owned land.”

Boyce v. Greater Lowell Reg'l Vocational Technical Sch. Dist., 389 N.E.2d 451 (Mass. App. Ct. 1979). · cites it 2× “476, was found lacking because it was silent as to what board of officers was to exercise the delegated power of eminent domain; it did not designate in whose behalf the takings were to be made as required by G.”

Burnham v. Mayor & Aldermen of Beverly, 35 N.E.2d 242 (Mass. 1941). “In order that no inference would be drawn that the quoted statement meant that land for a municipal airport could not be taken by eminent domain, the court immediately directed attention to other statutes regulating the establishment of *395 such airports, and concerning which…”

Harris v. Town of Wayland, 466 N.E.2d 822 (Mass. 1984). “3 These two votes were in accordance with G. L. c. 40, § 14, which requires that a decision to purchase or to acquire by eminent domain be authorized by a majority vote of the town and an appropriation be approved by a two-thirds vote of the town.”

Nabhan v. Bd. of Selectmen of Salisbury, 423 N.E.2d 1023 (Mass. App. Ct. 1981). “79, § 10, which had not been first authorized by town meeting, as required by G. L. c. 40, § 14. 10 In their complaint they alleged that the closing of The Driftway to vehicular traffic results in a loss of customers to their businesses which in turn diminishes their value as…”

Ballantine v. Town of Falmouth, 298 N.E.2d 695 (Mass. 1973). “In order to avoid supposed constitutional problems, the Appeals Court interpreted G. L. c. 40, § 14, to require inferentially that when property has been taken by eminent domain, the municipality must itself hold, use and operate the land, as long as the premises are needed for…”

Poremba v. City of Springfield, 238 N.E.2d 43 (Mass. 1968). “G. L. c. 40, § 14 (as amended through St.”

Show all 27 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.