Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 41, § 81K (2026)

Designation of subdivision control law

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 81K. Sections eighty-one K to eighty-one GG, inclusive, shall be designated and may be known as ''the subdivision control law''. This designation shall, when apt, include corresponding provisions of earlier laws.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1959–2021 · leading case: McLaughlin v. Bd. of Selectmen, 664 N.E.2d 786 (Mass. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
McLaughlin v. Bd. of Selectmen, 664 N.E.2d 786 (Mass. 1996). “Moreover, in order to use the locus for more than one single-family residence, the plaintiff would require special subdivision approval in accordance with the G. L. c. 41, §§ 81K et seq. (1994 ed.). Furthermore, because a dead end may not exceed 800 feet under the rules and…”
Freeman v. Plan. Bd., 646 N.E.2d 139 (Mass. 1995). “a residential subdivision to be called “Lost Oak Road,” on land between Prospect and Goodale Streets in the town. The plan showed two new subdivision roads, both ending in culsde-sac.”
The Bible Speaks v. Bd. of Appeals of Lenox, 391 N.E.2d 279 (Mass. App. Ct. 1979). “” 12 The requirement of a site plan and the type of development prospectus required by the informational statement would be perfectly appropriate for consideration of proposed subdivisions under the Subdivision Control Law, G. L. c. 41, § 81K et seq., or for the evaluation of…”
Ninety Six, LLC v. Wareham Fire Dist., 94 N.E.3d 397 (Mass. App. Ct. 2017). · cites it 2× “" 2 The plaintiff appeals, raising three arguments: (1) that § 42K prohibited the district from assessing betterments on subdivision lots because the subdivision rules were adopted pursuant to the subdivision control law, G. L. c. 41, §§ 81K to 81GG, and not the Zoning Act, G.”
Valcourt v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 718 N.E.2d 389 (Mass. App. Ct. 1999). “There has been no showing here that the Martellys could not create a building lot on parcel A by utilizing the procedures under G. L. c. 41, §§ 81K et seq., the subdivision control law.”
Melrose Fish & Game Club, Inc. v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., 52 N.E.3d 1089 (Mass. App. Ct. 2016). “See G. L. c. 41, § 81K. A planning board’s approval of a subdivision plan under the subdivision control law cannot act as a taking, see G.”
Castle Estates v. Park & Plan. Bd. of Medfield, 182 N.E.2d 540 (Mass. 1962). “1, 6 , we reviewed in detail the purposes and legislative background of essentially the present provisions of the subdivision control law (G. L. c. 41, §§ 81K to 81GG, as amended) and there is no occasion for repeating what was there said.”
Matthews v. Plan. Bd., 892 N.E.2d 797 (Mass. App. Ct. 2008). “See G. L. c. 41, §§ 81K to 81GG. Therefore, we must ascertain the intent of the board when it granted approval for the Wood Duck subdivision plan.”
Daley Constr. Co. v. Plan. Bd. of Randolph, 163 N.E.2d 27 (Mass. 1959). “The town had accepted the provisions of the subdivision control law, now found in G. L. c. 41, §§ 81K to *151 81GG, inserted by St.”
Murphy v. Plan. Bd., 874 N.E.2d 455 (Mass. App. Ct. 2007). “40A, § 5), and *397 of course, many critical steps in the arena of subdivision control (G. L. c. 41, § 81K, et seq.).” See G. L. c.”
Kay-Vee Realty Co. Inc. v. Town Clerk of Ludlow, 243 N.E.2d 813 (Mass. 1969). “Throughout this period the subdivision control law contained in G. L. c. 41, §§ 81K through 81GG, was in effect, the town having accepted the law.”
K. Hovnanian at Taunton, Inc. v. City of Taunton, 642 N.E.2d 1044 (Mass. App. Ct. 1994). “83, § 3, and G. L. c. 41, §§ 81K to 81GG, Hovnanian does not assert violation of any right secured by any other laws of the Commonwealth.”
Show all 24 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.