Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 81, § 7 (2026)

Acquisition of land outside limits of existing highway

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 7. If it is necessary to acquire land for the purposes of a state highway outside the limits of an existing public way, the department may take the same by eminent domain on behalf of the commonwealth under chapter seventy-nine. When injury has been caused to the real estate of any person by the laying out or alteration of a state highway, he may recover compensation therefor from the commonwealth under chapter seventy-nine. The mayor, if so authorized by the aldermen, or the selectmen, if so authorized by the town, may stipulate in writing in behalf of the city or town to indemnify and save harmless the commonwealth against all claims and demands for damages which may be sustained by any persons whose property has been taken for, or has been injured by the laying out or alteration of, any highway which the department proposes to lay out and construct or alter as a state highway, and thereupon such city or town shall be liable ultimately for the amount of any verdict against the commonwealth for such damages, and for costs, and the amount thereof may be recovered by the commonwealth in contract.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases, 1958–2010 · leading case: Morrissey v. New England Deaconess Ass'n - Abundant Life Communities, Inc., 458 Mass. 580 (Mass. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Morrissey v. New England Deaconess Ass'n - Abundant Life Communities, Inc., 458 Mass. 580 (Mass. 2010). · cites it 2× “79 (eminent domain) and G. L. c. 81, § 7 (compensation for injury to real estate caused by alteration of State highway), as well as under the common law of private nuisance and constitutional principles relating to the “taking” of private property.”

Paul's Lobster, Inc. v. Commonwealth, 758 N.E.2d 145 (Mass. App. Ct. 2001). · cites it 2× “The plaintiff’s complaint sought damages from the city and the Commonwealth in four counts, two of which it argues on appeal: (1) a “constructive taking”; and (2) a “state highway” claim pursuant to G. L. c. 81, §§ 7, 7A. The defendants argue in support of the judge’s decision…”

Malone v. Commonwealth, 389 N.E.2d 975 (Mass. 1979). “By G. L. c. 81, § 7, for "injury ... caused to the real estate of any person by the laying out or alteration of a state highway,” compensation may be recovered under G.”

Roman Catholic Bishop of Springfield v. Commonwealth, 392 N.E.2d 829 (Mass. 1979). “See G. L. c. 81, §§ 7, 7C; G. L. c. 79, §§ 14,16.”

Coach & Six Restaurant, Inc. v. Pub. Works Comm'n, 296 N.E.2d 501 (Mass. 1973). “, after notice and hearing, adopted an order taking this real estate and all the structures on it for highway construction under the authority of G. L. c. 81, § 7. The taking was recorded in the Worcester District Registry of Deeds on July 15, 1971.”

Holbrook v. Massachusetts Tpk. Auth., 154 N.E.2d 605 (Mass. 1958). “130, 139 , (G. L. c. 81, § 7, relating to the "injury .”

Murray Realty, Inc. v. Berke Moore Co., 175 N.E.2d 366 (Mass. 1961). “Old Colony R.R. 194 Mass. 302, 306 . If the damage was a necessary result under this test, the contractor is not liable in tort; but statutory recovery against the Commonwealth is allowed, even though the plaintiffs ’ properties were not taken.”

Morrissey v. New England Deaconess Ass'n-Abundant Life Communities, Inc., 26 Mass. L. Rptr. 599 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2009). · cites it 3× “In his Opposition to the Commonwealth’s Motion to Dismiss, Morrissey contends that the court has jurisdiction over these claims pursuant to G.L.c. 81, §7. This section, entitled “Acquisition of Land Outside Limits of Existing Highway,” initially provides that “[i]f it is…”

Soeder v. Desrocher, 10 Mass. L. Rptr. 604 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1999). “2 (referencing G.L.c. 81, §7 (State Highways); and c. 82, §7 (highways), §24 (town ways and private ways)).”

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.