Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 84, § 15 (2026)

Personal injuries or property damage from defective ways

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 15. If a person sustains bodily injury or damage in his property by reason of a defect or a want of repair or a want of a sufficient railing in or upon a way, and such injury or damage might have been prevented, or such defect or want of repair or want of railing might have been remedied by reasonable care and diligence on the part of the county, city, town or person by law obliged to repair the same, he may, if such county, city, town or person had or, by the exercise of proper care and diligence, might have had reasonable notice of the defect or want of repair or want of a sufficient railing, recover damages therefor from such county, city, town or person; but he shall not recover from a county, city, town or local water and sewer commission more than one fifth of one per cent of its state valuation last preceding the commencement of the action nor more than five thousand dollars; nor shall a county, city or town be liable for an injury or damage sustained upon a way laid out and established in the manner prescribed by statute until after an entry has been made for the purpose of constructing the way, or during the construction and repairing thereof, provided that the way shall have been closed, or other sufficient means taken to caution the public against entering thereon. No action shall be maintained under this section by a person the combined weight of whose carriage or vehicle and load exceeds six tons.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 147 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1923–2025 · leading case: Ram v. Town of Charlton, 567 N.E.2d 208 (Mass. 1991).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Ram v. Town of Charlton, 567 N.E.2d 208 (Mass. 1991). · cites it 14× “A judge of the Superior Court granted the town’s motion on the ground that the plaintiff’s exclusive remedy against the town was provided by G. L. c. 84, § 15, 2 and that her failure to give the notice required *484 by G.”

Gallant v. Worcester, 421 N.E.2d 1196 (Mass. 1981). · cites it 6× “[1] It claimed that the complaint only set forth a cause of action under G.L.c. 84, §§ 15, 18, and 19, and G.L.c. 229, § 1.”

Trioli v. Town of Sudbury, 446 N.E.2d 92 (Mass. App. Ct. 1983). · cites it 7× “The judge, in a memorandum and order, determined that the plaintiffs did not allege any defect in a public way within the meaning of G. L. c. 84, § 15, but did state a claim for “negligence or nuisance” under G.”

Meyer v. Veolia Energy North Am., 121 N.E.3d 1221 (Mass. 2019). · cites it 3× “He concluded that G. L. c. 84, § 15 ( § 15 or road defect statute), provided the exclusive remedy for Meyer's claim against Veolia.”

Huff v. City of Holyoke, 436 N.E.2d 952 (Mass. 1982). · cites it 5× “229, § 1, and G. L. c. 84, § 15, rather than one for common law nuisance.”

Wolf v. Boston Water & Sewer Comm'n, 561 N.E.2d 867 (Mass. 1990). · cites it 6× “The commission, the plaintiff contends, was not obliged to keep the roadway in repair and therefore is not a party to which G. L. c. 84, §§ 15 and 18, applies. 2 The motion judge granted the commission’s motion to dismiss and reported two issues for consideration: whether a *492…”

Farrell v. Boston Water & Sewer Comm'n, 24 Mass. App. Ct. 583 (Mass. App. Ct. 1987). · cites it 6× “She then brought an action against tihe city under G. L. c. 84, § 15, 3 as amended by St. 1965, c.”

Lavecchia v. Massachusetts Bay Transp. Auth., 804 N.E.2d 932 (Mass. 2004). · cites it 6× “” See G. L. c. 84, §§ 15, 18. 3 Because the plaintiff filed her claims against the MBTA nearly three years after the incident, the ultimate success of her suit hinges on our determination.”

Baird v. Massachusetts Bay Transp. Auth., 591 N.E.2d 210 (Mass. App. Ct. 1992). · cites it 5× “3 We affirm. For purposes of the appeal, the parties agree that the MBTA has a nonstatutory common law duty to inspect, maintain, and repair its signposts.”

Peters v. Haymarket Leasing, Inc., 835 N.E.2d 628 (Mass. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 3× “There is no question that the plaintiff’s allegation of negligence on the part of the authority (count 6) arose from his injury on what was a publicly maintained way within the meaning of G. L. c. 84, § 15. Cf. Polonsky v. Massachusetts Port Authy.”

Diamond v. City of Newton, 771 N.E.2d 186 (Mass. App. Ct. 2002). · cites it 5× “In count HI, the plaintiff sought a declaration that the grass and dirt area between the road and the sidewalk was not a public way pursuant to G. L. c. 84, § 15, and that therefore, the city’s liability was not limited to $5,000.”

DiNitto v. Town of Pepperell, 929 N.E.2d 979 (Mass. App. Ct. 2010). · cites it 5× “” G. L. c. 84, § 15. 2 See Trioli v. Sudbury, 15 Mass.”

Show all 147 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.