Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 84, § 20 (2026)

Omissions in notice; notice of insufficiency

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 20. A defendant shall not avail himself in defence of any omission to state in such notice the name or place of residence of the person injured, or the time, place or cause of the injury or damage, unless, within five days after receipt of a notice, given within the time required by law and by an authorized person referring to the injuries sustained and claiming damages therefor, the person receiving such notice, or some person in his behalf, notifies in writing the person injured, his executor or administrator, or the person giving or serving such notice in his behalf, that his notice is insufficient because it fails to state the name or place of residence of the person injured, or the time, place or cause of the injury or damage, as the case may be, and requests forthwith a written notice in compliance with law; provided, that if the notice does not contain either the place of residence of the person injured or the place of residence or business address of the person giving or serving the notice on behalf of the person so injured, such notice of insufficiency shall not be required, and the defendant may avail himself in defence of any omission or defect in the notice. If the person authorized to give such notice, within five days after the receipt of such request, gives a written notice complying with the law as to the name and place of residence of the person injured, and the time, place and cause of the injury or damage, such notice shall have the effect of the original notice, and shall be considered a part thereof.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases, 1925–2018 · leading case: Paddock v. Town of Brookline, 197 N.E.2d 321 (Mass. 1964).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Paddock v. Town of Brookline, 197 N.E.2d 321 (Mass. 1964). “See G. L. c. 84, § 20. Special legislation is the only means in Connecticut to avoid depriving the injured party of his cause of action because of certain formal defects in his seasonably given notice.”

Delano v. Garrettson-Ellis Lumber Co., 281 N.E.2d 282 (Mass. 1972). “G. L. c. 84, § 20, as appearing in St. 1939, c.”

Merrill v. City of Springfield, 187 N.E. 551 (Mass. 1933). “The defendant in accordance with the provision of G. L. c. 84, § 20, notified the plaintiff’s attorney that the notice was insufficient and *262 requested that additional notice be given forthwith stating more specifically the exact time, place and cause of the accident and…”

Brown v. Metro. Transit Auth., 171 N.E.2d 869 (Mass. 1961). “We are not sure whether the defendant also contends that a notice was required even if there was a defective condition to which snow and ice did not contribute. 1 There were no requests to that effect.”

Dooling v. City of Malden, 155 N.E. 636 (Mass. 1927). “If it be assumed that this letter of the city solicitor was the equivalent of a notice by the defendant that the notice of the plaintiff theretofore given was insufficient, no better notice was given by the plaintiff within the time permitted by G. L. c. 84, § 20. If it be…”

Wilkey v. Cetlin, 252 Mass. 152 (Mass. 1925). “G. L. c. 84, § 20. Exceptions overruled.”

Lewis v. Rocco Realty Trust, 111 N.E.3d 306 (Mass. App. Ct. 2018). “While the trust did not object to the content of Lewis's notice and was not entitled to dismissal on the ground that ice was not mentioned, see G. L. c. 84, § 20 ; Watts v. Rhodes , 325 Mass.”

Botello v. Massachusetts Port Auth., 7 Mass. L. Rptr. 662 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1997). · cites it 2× “The Botellos argue that, under G.L.c. 84, §20, Massport was required to notify the Botellos that their notice of injury was deficient.”

Booker v. Arch Realty Co. of Springfield, Inc., 47 Mass. App. Dec. 51 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1971). · cites it 2× “G.L. c. 84, § 20 * provides in substance *58 that a defendant shall not avail himself of certain omissions in a notice unless a counter notice is given.”

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.