G.L. c. 249, §§ 4, 5; Revere v. Massachusetts Gaming Commission, 476 Mass. 591 (2017)
Certiorari and mandamus in Massachusetts — sixty days, and only if nothing else works
A claim in Massachusetts trial courts · Last verified August 26, 2026
These are the two writs that survive in Massachusetts practice, and they exist for the cases nothing else covers. Both are residual: if another adequate route to review exists, neither is available.
Certiorari corrects errors in a decision by a body acting judicially where no appeal lies. Its deadline is sixty days, and the statute means it.
Mandamus compels an official to perform a duty they have no discretion to refuse. It has no fixed deadline, and it is defeated by discretion.
Certiorari — G.L. c. 249, § 4
What it is
Section 4 authorises "a civil action in the nature of certiorari to correct errors in proceedings which are not according to the course of the common law, which proceedings are not otherwise reviewable by motion or by appeal."
Translated: a body made a decision in a judicial or quasi-judicial way, it was not a court, and no statute gives you an appeal.
The three elements
Revere v. Massachusetts Gaming Commission, 476 Mass. 591 (2017), states them:
- A judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding — a decision made after some process, on a record, applying standards to facts;
- The absence of any other reasonably adequate remedy; and
- A substantial injury or injustice arising from the error.
Element two is the gatekeeper. Where a statute supplies a review route — a zoning appeal under c. 40A § 17, an administrative appeal under c. 30A, an agency's own appellate process — that route governs and certiorari is unavailable.
Element one excludes legislative and purely administrative acts. A town meeting vote, a policy decision, or a purely ministerial determination is not quasi-judicial, and certiorari does not reach it.
What it reaches in practice
Decisions of local licensing authorities where no appeal is provided; school committee and municipal disciplinary decisions; civil service and personnel determinations outside the statutory appeal routes; retirement board decisions; and prison disciplinary proceedings.
Sixty days
Section 4: "Such action shall be commenced within sixty days next after the proceeding complained of."
Sixty days from the proceeding — not from when the plaintiff learned of it, and not from when they found a lawyer. Massachusetts treats the period strictly, and a late certiorari action is dismissed without reaching the merits.
Where to file
Section 4 gives a choice, and it turns on subject matter. The Supreme Judicial Court or the Superior Court generally; the Land Court where the matter "involves any right, title or interest in land, or arises under or involves the subdivision control law, the zoning act or municipal zoning, or subdivision ordinances, by-laws or regulations"; and the District Court where the matter involves fence viewers.
The standard of review
The court reviews the record of the proceeding below to correct substantial errors of law. It does not take evidence and it does not substitute its judgment for the agency's on the facts.
That is the opposite of a zoning appeal under c. 40A § 17, which is a de novo factual hearing. Certiorari is record review, and the record is what the plaintiff has to work with.
Mandamus — G.L. c. 249, § 5
What it is
An action to compel a public official or body to perform a duty.
What it requires
- A clear legal duty owed to the plaintiff;
- That the duty is ministerial, not discretionary; and
- No other adequate remedy.
Element two is where these cases die. Mandamus compels an official to act; it does not tell them how to decide. Where a statute leaves the official any judgment about what to do, mandamus will not direct the outcome.
The classic distinction: a court may order a clerk to record a document the clerk has no discretion to refuse. It may not order a board to grant a permit the board has discretion to deny — though it may order the board to hold the hearing it has refused to hold.
No deadline
Section 5 sets none. Laches governs — an unreasonable delay that prejudiced the defendant will bar the claim, and the absence of a fixed period is not licence to wait.
Where to file
The Supreme Judicial Court or the Superior Court.
How they relate to the other routes
This is the practical question in most cases, and the ordering is fixed.
A specific statutory review provision governs. If the legislature gave you an appeal — c. 40A § 17 for zoning, c. 30A for state agency adjudications, a licensing statute's own appeal — use it. Both writs are unavailable, and so is declaratory judgment as a substitute for a review route the plaintiff let lapse.
Certiorari fills the gap where the decision was quasi-judicial and no appeal exists.
Mandamus fills a different gap — where the complaint is not that a decision was wrong but that no decision was made, or that a plain duty is being refused.
Declaratory judgment addresses the meaning of a statute, by-law or regulation prospectively, rather than reviewing a particular decision. It is not a way around the sixty days.
A plaintiff who is unsure which applies sometimes pleads in the alternative, and the risk of guessing wrong is why: certiorari has a sixty-day fuse, and by the time a court rules that certiorari rather than declaratory judgment was the right vehicle, the sixty days are long gone.
What has to happen before you file
Exhaust the administrative process. Both writs require the absence of another adequate remedy, and an available agency appeal that has not been taken is another adequate remedy.
Obtain the record, for certiorari — the case is decided on it.
What the claim pays
Annulment of the decision, or a remand to the body for further proceedings, on certiorari.
An order compelling performance, on mandamus.
No damages on either. These are review and compulsion mechanisms, not compensation claims. A plaintiff who wants money is looking at the Tort Claims Act, the Civil Rights Act, or a contract claim.
Costs, in the court's discretion under G.L. c. 249 § 8. Generally no attorney's fees.
Common defenses
- Another adequate remedy exists — the defence that disposes of most of these cases.
- Untimeliness — the sixty days, for certiorari; laches, for mandamus.
- The proceeding was not quasi-judicial.
- The duty is discretionary, which defeats mandamus.
- No substantial injury.
- The plaintiff lacks standing.
What people get wrong
Sixty days runs from the proceeding, not from discovery of it.
Certiorari is record review. No new evidence, and no fresh factual hearing — unlike a zoning appeal.
Mandamus cannot dictate a discretionary decision. It compels action, not a particular outcome.
If a statutory appeal exists, use it. Both writs are residual, and choosing the wrong vehicle usually means the right one has expired.
Neither pays damages.
A declaratory judgment action is not a substitute for a review route the plaintiff missed.
Where they came from
Certiorari and mandamus are among the ancient prerogative writs, issued by the King's Bench to supervise inferior tribunals and public officers. Certiorari — "to be informed" — brought the record up for review. Mandamus — "we command" — ordered an official to do their job.
Massachusetts abolished the writs as such and replaced them with civil actions in the nature of each, which is what c. 249 §§ 4 and 5 provide. The substance survived the procedural modernisation because the underlying need did.
That need is a consequence of how much decision-making happens outside courts. Licensing boards, retirement boards, school committees, civil service commissions and prison disciplinary panels decide questions that affect people's livelihoods, and the Legislature has not supplied an appeal from all of them. Without certiorari, those decisions would be unreviewable however wrong.
The residual character is the deliberate limit. These writs exist for the gaps, and courts guard the boundary carefully — because a general supervisory jurisdiction over every administrative decision would put judges in charge of a great deal of government they have no special competence to run.
The sixty-day period reflects the same instinct from the other direction. Administrative decisions have to become final so that people can act on them, and a permit, a licence or a personnel decision that might be annulled a year later is one nobody can rely on.
Common questions
How long do I have to file a certiorari action in Massachusetts?
Sixty days from the proceeding complained of, under G.L. c. 249 § 4. The period is strictly applied.
What is certiorari for?
Correcting substantial legal errors in a quasi-judicial proceeding that no statute makes reviewable by motion or appeal.
What is mandamus for?
Compelling a public official or body to perform a clear, non-discretionary duty. It cannot direct how a discretionary decision comes out.
What if a statute gives me an appeal?
Then use it. Both writs are unavailable where another reasonably adequate remedy exists.
Can the court hear new evidence?
Not on certiorari — it reviews the record of the proceeding below. That is the main difference from a zoning appeal under c. 40A § 17, which is heard de novo.
Can I recover damages or attorney's fees?
No. These actions annul a decision or compel performance. Costs are discretionary; fees generally are not available.