Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 43B, § 14 (2026)

Enforcement of this chapter; declaratory relief; judicial review

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 14. (1) The superior court shall, upon petition of ten or more registered voters or of the attorney general, have jurisdiction in equity to enforce the provisions of this chapter.

(2) The provisions of chapter two hundred and thirty-one A applicable to municipal by-laws or ordinances shall apply to charters, charter revisions, charter amendments, by-laws and ordinances of a city or town adopted under this chapter. In addition, a petition for declaratory relief under chapter two hundred and thirty-one A may be brought on behalf of the public by the attorney general or, by leave of the court, by ten or more registered voters of the city or town. In the case of a petition brought by ten registered voters, the attorney general shall be served with notice of the preliminary petition for leave, and may intervene as a party at any stage of the proceedings; and the petitioners shall be liable for, but may in the court's discretion also be awarded, costs, which may include reasonable counsel fees.

(3) Judicial review to determine the validity of the procedures whereby any charter is adopted, revised or amended may be had by petition of ten or more registered voters of the city or town brought within thirty days after the election at which such charter, revision, or amendment is approved. If no such petition is filed within such period, compliance with all the procedures required by this act and the validity of the manner in which such charter, revision or amendment was approved shall be conclusively presumed. No charter adoption, revision or amendment shall be deemed invalid on account of any procedural error or omission unless it is shown that the error or omission materially and substantially affected such adoption, revision or amendment.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1973–2001 · leading case: Bloom v. City of Worcester, 293 N.E.2d 268 (Mass. 1973).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bloom v. City of Worcester, 293 N.E.2d 268 (Mass. 1973). · cites it 2× “G. L. c. 43B, § 14 (2). The question is whether the plaintiffs or the taxpayers of the city should sustain the plaintiffs’ costs in this proceeding.”

Tiberio v. Town of Methuen, 307 N.E.2d 302 (Mass. 1974). · cites it 3× “G. L. c. 43B, § 14 (3). 2. The plaintiffs contend next that the charter commission failed to file with the town clerk “a complete account of all its receipts and expenditures for public inspection” within thirty days after submission of its final report.”

Gibbons v. State Ballot Law Comm'n, 439 N.E.2d 301 (Mass. 1982). “578, 583 (1974) (procedural errors in distributing report of charter commission not shown to have “materially and substantially affected” [G. L. c. 43B, § 14 (3) ] a vote adopting a home rule charter).”

Wright v. City of Lawrence, 21 Mass. App. Ct. 343 (Mass. App. Ct. 1985). “The ground of jurisdiction alleged for a suit by the ten voters was G. L. c. 43B, § 14(2), inserted by St. 1966, c.”

Marino v. Town Council, 13 Mass. L. Rptr. 14 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2001). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to G.L.c. 43B, §14, the plaintiffs seek declaratory judgment that an initiative petition submitted to the Town Council for the Town of Southbridge (Town Council) was valid.”

Quigley v. Reilly, 13 Mass. L. Rptr. 480 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2001). “” On June 28, 2001, the plaintiffs filed a complaint for equitable relief with this Court, pursuant to G.L.c. 43B, §14(1), asserting that the advisoiy opinion violated the Attorney General’s duty under Chapter 43B.”

Gabriel v. Mayor of Fitchburg, 439 N.E.2d 841 (Mass. App. Ct. 1982). “Thereupon ten taxpayers (nine members of the city council and the chief of police) sought a declaration pursuant to G. L. c. 43B, § 14(2), and G. L. c. 231A that the ordinance was valid.”

— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 43B, § 14(1) — 1 case

Quigley v. Reilly, 13 Mass. L. Rptr. 480 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2001). “” On June 28, 2001, the plaintiffs filed a complaint for equitable relief with this Court, pursuant to G.L.c. 43B, §14(1), asserting that the advisoiy opinion violated the Attorney General’s duty under Chapter 43B.”

— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 43B, § 14(2) — 4 cases

Tiberio v. Town of Methuen, 307 N.E.2d 302 (Mass. 1974). “G. L. c. 43B, § 14 (3). 2. The plaintiffs contend next that the charter commission failed to file with the town clerk “a complete account of all its receipts and expenditures for public inspection” within thirty days after submission of its final report.”

Wright v. City of Lawrence, 21 Mass. App. Ct. 343 (Mass. App. Ct. 1985). “The ground of jurisdiction alleged for a suit by the ten voters was G. L. c. 43B, § 14(2), inserted by St. 1966, c.”

Marino v. Town Council, 13 Mass. L. Rptr. 14 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2001). “Pursuant to G.L.c. 43B, §14, the plaintiffs seek declaratory judgment that an initiative petition submitted to the Town Council for the Town of Southbridge (Town Council) was valid.”

Gabriel v. Mayor of Fitchburg, 439 N.E.2d 841 (Mass. App. Ct. 1982). “Thereupon ten taxpayers (nine members of the city council and the chief of police) sought a declaration pursuant to G. L. c. 43B, § 14(2), and G. L. c. 231A that the ordinance was valid.”

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.