Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 92, § 36 (2026)

Liability for defects in boulevards; notice

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 36. The commonwealth shall be liable for injuries sustained by persons while traveling on any boulevard maintained by the division under authority of the preceding section, if the same are caused by defects within the limits of the constructed traveled roadway, in the manner and subject to the limitations, conditions and restrictions specified in sections fifteen, eighteen and nineteen of chapter eighty-four, except that the commonwealth shall not be liable for injury sustained because of the want of a railing in or upon any boulevard, or for injury sustained upon the sidewalk of a boulevard or during the construction, reconstruction or repair of such boulevard. All sums recovered against said division under the foregoing provisions, together with any costs of suit and counsel fees, expenses and interest, shall be deemed expenses of care and maintenance of boulevards.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases, 1927–2000 · leading case: Rogers v. Metro. Dist. Comm'n, 465 N.E.2d 280 (Mass. App. Ct. 1984).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Rogers v. Metro. Dist. Comm'n, 465 N.E.2d 280 (Mass. App. Ct. 1984). · cites it 6× “756 [1974]), on the ground that G. L. c. 92, § 36, immunizes the Commonwealth *338 from liability for injury sustained upon a sidewalk under the jurisdiction of the MDC.”

Kemble v. Metro. Dist. Comm'n, 727 N.E.2d 529 (Mass. App. Ct. 2000). · cites it 6× “The question before us is whether, as matter of law, an outdoor stairway leading to a pedestrian overpass is to be considered a sidewalk for the purposes of G. L. c. 92, § 36. The question arises because the plaintiff, Peter Kemble, claims to have been injured while descending…”

Mitchell v. Metro. Dist. Comm'n, 351 N.E.2d 536 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976). “control (G. L. c. 92, § 36; see Longo v. Metropolitan Dist.”

White v. Metro. Dist. Comm'n, 21 Mass. App. Ct. 106 (Mass. App. Ct. 1985). · cites it 2× “258, but under G. L. c. 92, § 36 (liability of the MDC for defects in public ways).”

Tivnan v. Registrar of Motor Vehs., 734 N.E.2d 1182 (Mass. App. Ct. 2000). “392, which amended the first sentence of the construction clause to include reference to G. L. c. 92, § 36, in the saving provision.”

Poppel v. Boston Elevated Ry. Co., 155 N.E. 267 (Mass. 1927). “By G. L. c. 92, § 36, a liability was created arising out of defect or want of repair on any boulevard maintained by the commission under § 35, and the same rights and remedies were given in relation thereto as are provided by law in relation to the repair of public ways.”

Gleason v. Metro. Dist. Comm'n, 170 N.E. 395 (Mass. 1930). “There is special provision in G. L. c. 92, § 36, for liability for personal injuries sustained by travellers on boulevards laid out as was the Old Colony Boulevard.”

Longo v. Metro. Dist. Comm'n, 202 N.E.2d 796 (Mass. 1964). “The Commonwealth does not appear to contend that G. L. c. 92, § 36 (see fn. 1), is not applicable.”

Golb v. Dembs, 1 Mass. L. Rptr. 66 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1993). · cites it 4× “The threshold issue in this dispute concerns whether Golb’s action against the Commonwealth for the allegedly negligent conduct of Officer Sullivan is controlled by the Road Defect Statute, G.L.c. 92, §36. Specifically, the Commonwealth argues that when Officer Sullivan decided…”

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.