FEDERAL · 28 U.S.C. · Chapter 5
Massachusetts
Current through Pub. L. 119-102
Massachusetts constitutes one judicial district.
Court shall be held at Boston, New Bedford, Springfield, and Worcester.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
28 U.S.C. § 101 (Massachusetts) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
United States v. Parker
103 F.2d 857 (Third Circuit, 1939)
Hale v. United States
25 F.2d 430 (Eighth Circuit, 1928)
Commonwealth v. Armstrong
897 N.E.2d 105 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2008)
United States v. Bink
74 F. Supp. 603 (D. Oregon, 1947)
United States v. Gruberg
493 F. Supp. 234 (S.D. New York, 1979)
United States v. Parker
19 F. Supp. 450 (D. New Jersey, 1937)
In re Jefferson County
474 B.R. 228 (N.D. Alabama, 2012)
Teter v. Glass Onion, Inc.
723 F. Supp. 2d 1138 (W.D. Missouri, 2010)
Norvell M. Bickford v. C. H. Looney, Warden
219 F.2d 555 (Tenth Circuit, 1955)
Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Icahn (In Re Trans World Airlines, Inc.)
278 B.R. 42 (D. Delaware, 2002)
Schwinn Plan Committee v. AFS Cycle & Co. (In Re Schwinn Bicycle Co.)
190 B.R. 599 (N.D. Illinois, 1995)
Barrett v. United States
82 F.2d 528 (Seventh Circuit, 1936)
Arrowsmith v. Lemberg Law, LLC (In re Health Diagnostics Laboratory, Inc.)
571 B.R. 182 (E.D. Virginia, 2017)
Charles W. Ross Builder, Inc. v. Olsen Fine Home Building, LLC
827 F. Supp. 2d 607 (E.D. Virginia, 2011)
In Re Ondrey
227 B.R. 211 (W.D. New York, 1998)
Son v. Coal Equity, Inc. (In Re Centennial Coal, Inc.)
278 B.R. 54 (D. Delaware, 2002)
Global Control Sys., Inc. v. Luebbert (In re Luebbert)
595 B.R. 314 (W.D. Missouri, 2018)
In Re Jefferson County, Ala.
465 B.R. 243 (N.D. Alabama, 2012)
Hoffmeyer v. Loewen Group International, Inc.
279 B.R. 471 (D. Delaware, 2002)
Brennan v. City of Leominster
180 F.R.D. 192 (D. Massachusetts, 1998)
Source Credit
History
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 882.)
Editorial Notes
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §167 (Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §87, 36 Stat. 1114; May 1, 1922, ch. 173, 42 Stat. 503; May 17, 1926, ch. 306, 44 Stat. 559).
Words "and the terms at Boston shall not be terminated or affected by the terms at Springfield, New Bedford, or Worcester," were omitted as covered by section 138 of this title.
Provisions relating to appointment of deputy clerks and deputy marshals, and maintenance of office by said deputies were omitted as covered by sections 541 [see 561], 542 [see 561], and 751 of this title.
Provisions for furnishing rooms and accommodations at Springfield and Worcester were omitted as obsolete upon advice of Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts that federal accommodations have been provided at such places.
A provision requiring the return of all process to the terms at Boston and the keeping of all court papers in the clerk's office at Boston, unless otherwise specially ordered by the court, was omitted, since such matters can be regulated more appropriately by court rule or order. See Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 4(g).
The provision respecting court accommodations at New Bedford was omitted as covered by section 142 of this title.
Changes in arrangement and phraseology were made.
Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §167 (Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §87, 36 Stat. 1114; May 1, 1922, ch. 173, 42 Stat. 503; May 17, 1926, ch. 306, 44 Stat. 559).
Words "and the terms at Boston shall not be terminated or affected by the terms at Springfield, New Bedford, or Worcester," were omitted as covered by section 138 of this title.
Provisions relating to appointment of deputy clerks and deputy marshals, and maintenance of office by said deputies were omitted as covered by sections 541 [see 561], 542 [see 561], and 751 of this title.
Provisions for furnishing rooms and accommodations at Springfield and Worcester were omitted as obsolete upon advice of Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts that federal accommodations have been provided at such places.
A provision requiring the return of all process to the terms at Boston and the keeping of all court papers in the clerk's office at Boston, unless otherwise specially ordered by the court, was omitted, since such matters can be regulated more appropriately by court rule or order. See Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 4(g).
The provision respecting court accommodations at New Bedford was omitted as covered by section 142 of this title.
Changes in arrangement and phraseology were made.