Massachusetts
How Buhl v. State of Wisconsin applies in Massachusetts: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts.
Massachusetts follows the doctrine of sovereign immunity, which limits the circumstances under which the state can be held liable for torts. However, it also recognizes exceptions for negligence claims under certain statutory provisions.
In Massachusetts, the state may be liable for tortious acts if it was engaged in a proprietary function, or if a statute expressly allows for recovery against the state.
The court held that the state could be held liable under the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act for negligent acts performed by state employees during the course of their employment.
The court determined that the state could be liable for injuries resulting from its public highway maintenance activities under specific conditions.
The court ruled that the city was not immune from liability for negligence involving the improper maintenance of city property.
Massachusetts's sovereign immunity principles often parallel the federal standard, which also limits government liability through the Federal Tort Claims Act. However, Massachusetts has carving exceptions that provide more avenues for recovery compared to federal law, particularly under its Tort Claims Act.
Understanding the nuances of state sovereign immunity and the exceptions recognized in Massachusetts is critical for the Massachusetts bar exam, especially in torts and public entity liability.