Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 41, § 81FF (2026)

Application of subdivision control law on registered and unregistered land; jurisdiction of land court

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 81FF. So far as land which has not been registered in the land court is affected by the subdivision control law, recording of the plan of a subdivision in the registry of deeds before the subdivision control law was in effect in the city or town in which the subdivision was located shall not exempt the land within such subdivision from the operation of said law except with respect to lots which had been sold and were held in ownership separate from that of the remainder of the subdivision when said law went into effect in such city or town, and to rights of way and other easements appurtenant to such lots; and plans of subdivisions which were recorded in the registry of deeds and subdivisions made without the recording of a plan after said law had gone into effect in such city or town and before February first, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, without receiving the approval of the planning board of such city or town, shall have the same validity and effect as if the subdivision control law became effective in such city or town on February first, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, as above provided.

So far as land which has been registered in the land court is affected by said law, any plan of a subdivision which has been registered or confirmed by said court before February first, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, whether the subdivision control law was in effect in the city or town in which the subdivision was located or not, and whether the plan of the subdivision was approved by the planning board or not, shall have the same validity in all respects as if said plan had been so approved, but the land court shall not register or confirm a plan of a subdivision in a city or town in which the subdivision control law is in effect which has been filed on or after February first, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, unless it has first verified the fact that the plan filed with it has been approved by the planning board, or would otherwise be entitled if it had related to unregistered land, to be recorded in the registry of deeds. The land court shall have jurisdiction in so far as affects land registered or to be registered or confirmed under chapter one hundred and eighty-five, to determine whether the subdivision control law has been complied with, and shall verify before registering or confirming any plan of land in any city or town in which the subdivision control law is in effect, that the plan filed with it is entitled to be recorded in accordance with the subdivision control law, and every plan heretofore or hereafter registered or confirmed by the land court pursuant to said chapter one hundred and eighty-five shall for the purposes of the subdivision control law be deemed to be, and shall be invested with all the rights and privileges of, a plan approved pursuant to said law. In case of conditions imposed pursuant to section eighty-one R or eighty-one U of said law, and set forth or referred to by endorsement on the plan filed with it, the land court shall cause said conditions to be set forth or referred to on the plan prepared by it therefrom for registration or confirmation, or in the decree of registration or confirmation or certificate of title issued for the land shown thereon.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1976–2021 · leading case: Sturges v. Town of Chilmark, 402 N.E.2d 1346 (Mass. 1980).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Sturges v. Town of Chilmark, 402 N.E.2d 1346 (Mass. 1980). “” G. L. c. 41, § 81FF, as appearing in St. 1953, c.”

Don Perry v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Hull & Others., 100 Mass. App. Ct. 19 (Mass. App. Ct. 2021). “" Although ROW 2 is a boundary of the locus, the northern portion of ROW 3 is not.”

Spalke v. Bd. of Appeals of Plymouth, 389 N.E.2d 788 (Mass. App. Ct. 1979). “41, § 81L; that it qualified for the exemption of G. L. c. 41, § 81FF; that § 300.05 of the Plymouth by-law was not applicable to the lot because of the zoning exemption of G.”

Massachusetts Broken Stone Co. v. Town of Weston, 701 N.E.2d 636 (Mass. App. Ct. 1998). “240, § 14A, the court construed the application of G. L. c. 41, § 81FF, and G. L. c. 40A, § 6, to petitioner’s property; Whitinsville Retirement Soc.”

Clows v. Plan. Bd., 12 Mass. App. Ct. 129 (Mass. App. Ct. 1981). · cites it 2× “As to each parcel the plaintiffs have staked their claim to a § 8 IP endorsement on the exemption from subdivision control provided for in G. L. c. 41, § 81FF, as appearing in St. 1953, c.”

Ostroff v. Bd. of Appeals, 358 N.E.2d 451 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976). “For that reason we need not decide whether, as contended by the plaintiff, the decree of the Land Court entered forty-four years after the 1914 recording had the belated effect (by operation of G. L. c. 41, § 81FF) of constituting First Street an “approved” street and thus…”

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.