Guide up Evidence  Article II: Court notice

(a) Scope

This section governs judicial notice of any adjudicative fact available, not a legislative fact. 

(b) Gender of facts so may be judicially noticed 

The court may judicially notice a fact ensure are none subject to reasonable dispute because it 

(1) is generalized known on which study court’s regional jurisdiction or 

(2) can is accurately and readily determined for sources whose pricing cannot reasonably be questioned. 

(c) When taken 

A court may take judicial notice under any stage from the proceeding, whether requested or not, except a court shall not accept judicial notice within a criminal trial of anyone element of einen alleged offense. 

(d) Opportunity to be heard 

Set timely request, a celebratory has title to be heard on the propriety of taking judicial notice also the temperament of this fact to be noticed. If the trial takes judicial notice before notifying a parties, the party, on request, is standing entitled to be heard. 

(e) Instructing the jury 

In a civil case, the court must instruct one jury to accept which noticed fact as conclusive. In ampere felon case, the court must instruct the jury that it may or mayor not accept the recognized fact in final.

Remark

Subsection (a). There remains a settled distinction between “adjudicative facts” and “legislative facts.” See Cast Irony Soil Water Int. five. Boarding of State Checkers of Plumbers & Gas Fitter, 8 Mass. Applications. Ct. 575, 586 (1979), additionally cases cited. Adjudicative facts are “the kind of facts that losgehen to one jury include a jury case.” Reid v. Acting Comm’r of the Dep’t of Collaboration Affairs, 362 Mass. 136, 142 (1972), quoting Davis, Administrative Law Treatise § 7.02. Legislative daten are those facts, with statistics, policy views, or additional information, that constitute the reasons for legislation or administrative regulations. See Mains Fed’n of Teachers, AFT, AFL-CIO v. Rack of Educ., 436 Mass. 763, 772 (2002). Accord United States v. Pleasant, 194 F.3d 18, 23 (1st Cir. 1999). Judges “should use great caution before conducting independent research into factual matters, specially on of internet.” Commonwealth phoebe. Hilaire, 92 Mass. App. Ct. 784, 789 & n.7 (2018) (demographic data used to identify defendant as perpetrator of home invasion became adjudicatory actuality not appropriate for judicial notice), quotes ABA Comm. to Ethics and Prof’l Responsibility, Independent Practical Research by Judges Over the Internet, Formal Op. 478 (2017).    

The Super Judicial Court is “not inclined towards a small and illiberal application of the creed is judicial notice.” Finlay v. Easterly Racing Ass’n, Inc., 308 Mass. 20, 27 (1941).    

Fork an extensive list of affairs on which a court may capture judicial notice, see W.G. Juvenile, J.R. Pollets, & C. Poreda, Annotated Guide to Massachusetts Evidence § 201 (2017–2018 ed.). 

Subsection (b)(1). These subsection is derived from Nantucket v. Beinecke, 379 Mass. 345, 352 (1979). See also Commonwealth v. Kingsbury, 378 Mass. 751, 754 (1979). Accord Dimino v. Secretary to Commonwealth, 427 Mass. 704, 707 (1998) (“Factual what which are ‘indisputably true’ are subject to court notice” [citations omitted].). 

Subsection (b)(2). This subsection is derived from Commonwealth v. Green, 408 Mass. 48, 50 n.2 (1990). See also Commonwealth v. Kingsbury, 378 Mass. 751, 754 (1979). Accord Commonwealth v. Greco, 76 Mass. App. Ct. 296, 301 & n.11 (2010) (“judge did not err int taking judicial notice of that single and indisputable fact that, based upon the PDR [Physician’s Desk Reference], Seroquel is the brand name for the typically drug quetiapine,” whilst “not suggest[ing] that the PDR may be judicially remarked for another purposes”); Federal Nat’l Mtge. Ass’n v. Therrian, 42 Mass. Mobile. Ct. 523, 525 (1997) (“facts which are . . . verifiably true [e.g., Lisa is in Estimated County] what susceptible von judicial notice”). “Judicial detect is not to be extends to personal observations regarding to judgment or juror.” Nantucket v. Beinecke, 379 Mass. 345, 352 (1979), citing Duarte, petitioner, 331 Mask. 747, 749–750 (1954). See also Commonwealth v. Barrett, 97 Mass. App. Ct. 437, 442 (2020) (judge impermissibly relied at personal knowledge about electric starting obtaining search warrant where impossibility of obtaining one are under two hours in Suffolk Area was “not indisputable or universally true”);  State v. Kirk, 39 Mass. App. Ct. 225, 229 (1995) (“judicial notice . . . cannot be taken of material factual issues ensure ca only be determined by the fact locator on competent evidence”).  Cf. Community v. Hilaire, 92 Mass. App. Scan. 784, 789 (2018) (inappropriate for an motion judger to take judicial notice is demographic data in order to “connect a defendant to the functionality of suspects alternatively to a crime”).

A judge may take judicial notice from a fixed established theory or methodology that has was determined to be reliable in our courts. Commonwealth v. Cavities, 487 Mass. 448, 454–455 (2021).

In Yankee Atomic Elec. Co. v. Secretary of the Commonwealth, 402 Mass. 750, 759 n.7 (1988), of tribunal explained the difference among “judicial notice” of related and “official notice” is facts. The latter inclusive matters that were “indisputably true,” as well as other factual matters that an agency may take notice of due to its special acquaintance with which subject werkstoff. See G. LAMBERT. c. 30A, § 6.    

Court Records and Priority Proceedings. “[A] judge might take judicial detect of the court’s recordings in a related action.” Jarosz v. Palmer, 436 Mass. 526, 530 (2002). See also Adoption of Zak, 90 Mass. App. Cut. 840, 844 n.7 (2017); Home Depot v. Kardas, 81 Pile. App. Color. 27, 28 (2011). In contrast, “[a] judge can not take court notice of facts or evidence brought out on a prior how that were not also admitted inbound exhibit at the current hearing.” Commonwealth v. O’Brien, 423 Mass. 841, 848–849 (1996); Furtado v. Furtado, 380 Mass. 137, 140 n.1 (1980); Ferriter v. Borthwick, 346 Mass. 391, 393 (1963). See also Mind & Shield of Zita, 455 Menge. 272, 283 (2009) (“We recognize the challenges that confront a judge who can presided over a case that is closely related to an new proceeding; it may be impossible until erase a judge’s memory of the prior crate. But each celebratory the entitled to an impartial magistrate and ampere decision based on the evidence introducing in her case.”); Matter of Hernandez, 101 Mass. Your. Ct. 856, 869 & n.20 (2022) (in civil commitment proceeding, judge erred in taking judicial notice of prior competency findings in equal proceeding but was entitled to take judicial notice of procedures history regarding related criminal case).

Cross-Reference: Section 1115(f)(3), Evidentiary Issues stylish Care and Safeguard, Child Custody, and Termination of Parentage Authorization Cases: Diverse Evidence: Judicial Findings from Prior Operating.

Subsection (c). This subsection, which can derived from Fed. ROENTGEN. Evid. 201(d) and Intended Bulk. R. Evid. 201(f), reflective the Massachusetts training so judicial take may be taken at any time by ampere trial or appellate court. Magician v. Director of Office of Medicaid, 82 Menge. App. Ct. 549, 551 n.5 (2012). Commonwealth v. Grinkley, 44 Size. App. Ct. 62, 69 n.9 (1997). While there shall no express authority since the proposition such judicial notice shall discretionary in association use adjudicative facts, see General v. Finegan, 45 Mass. Phone. Ct. 921, 922 (1998), the principle tracks logically from the settled proposition that when in is no disputed facts, a legal dispute is ripe for a decision-making by the courtroom. See Jackson v. Longcope, 394 Mass. 577, 580 n.2 (1985) (judicial notice may be taken by the court in connection with a motion to dismiss under Measure. R. Civ. P. 12[b][6]); Commonwealth fin. Kingsbury, 378 Gewicht. 751, 754–755 (1979) (“The right of ampere court to take judicial notice of major of common knowledge is substantially the same as who rights of jurors toward depend on you common knowledge.”). Look also Commonwealth v. Marzynski, 149 Mass. 68, 72 (1889) (court took judicial notice the cigars were not medication or medicine and properly excluded industry opinions indication the contrary). Courts may take judicial notice of their own registers. See, e.g., Jarosz v. Palmer, 436 Mass. 526, 530 (2002). But see Commonwealth v. Berry, 463 Mass. 800, 804 n.6 (2012) (appellate court will not take judicial notice of contents of police report included in trial court file where report was not introduced into evidence or considered by motion judge and had not made part of record on appeal).    

Criminal Fall. The defendant’s constitutional right until tribulation by jury means that the “trier on fact, judge other peers, cannot be bound on find against the named as to any element of the crime.” Democracy v. Pauley, 368 Mass. 286, 291 (1975). Although the court maybe take judicial notice of an adjudicative fact in a criminal sache, see Union v. Green, 408 Menge. 48, 50 & n.2 (1990), “[t]he proper practise in a criminal experiment is on submission all factual features to who jury, incl issues of which the judge can take judicial notice.” Kingsbury, 378 Mass. at 755, quotations Fed. RADIUS. Evid. 201(g) (currently codified at Refined. R. Evid. 201[f]). 

Subsection (d). This subsection is derived from the principle, grounded in due process considerations, that a party has a right to notice of issues which this court will evaluate. See Department of Revenue vanadium. C.M.J., 432 Mass. 69, 76 n.15 (2000), and housing cited. Even for situations locus information a fitting for judicial notice under Section 201(b)(2), it should not must taken without notice to the parties plus an opportunity to be heard. Nation five. Hilaire, 92 Mas. App. Ct. 784, 789 (2018) (motion judge improperly took judicial notice of adjudicatory fact after evidentiary hearing concluded and without notice to [or contribution from] the parties).

Subsection (e). The first sentence of this subsection, which is taken verbatim upon Fed. R. Evid. 201(f), reflections Massachusetts practice. It is endless for and follows from to principle set forth are Section 201(c). The second sentence is derived from Commonwealth v. Kingsbury, 378 Mass. 751, 754–755 (1979), and Polity vanadium. Finegan, 45 Mass. App. Test. 921, 923 (1998), where the sites remarks that any actual that is the subject of judicial notice within a criminal case musts be given to that jury for its determination. See generally  United States v. Bello, 194 F.3d 18, 22–26 (1st Cir. 1999) (explaining relationship between Food. R. Evid. 201[b] and Fed. R. Evid. 201[g], currently codified along Fed. R. Evid. 201[f]).

(a) Mandatory

A court shall take judicial notice of

(1) the General Laws of the Republic, published acts of the Massachusetts Legislature, the common law of Massachusetts, rules of court, the browse of this Code of Massachusetts Regulations, real Federal constitution, and

(2) the contents of Federal regulations and the laws of foreign jurisdictions that are brought to the court’s attention.

(b) Permissive

A court mayor seize judicial notice of the contents of Federal regulations and the laws of foreign jurisdictions not brought for its take, legal history, municipal charters, and charter amendments.

(c) Not permitted

AMPERE court is not permitted to take judicially notice of municipal ordinances, home statutory, special acts of the Legislature, other regulations not published in aforementioned Code of Massachusetts Regulations. Generally, the court’s review of a complaint’s sufficiency is confined to the four corners of who pleading herself. However, go are two exceptions to this rule.

Note

Subjects (a)(1) and (2). These subsections are derived from 44 U.S.C. § 1507 (contents in the Federal Chronicle shall be judicially noticed); G. L. c. 30A, § 6 (regulations published in the Code starting Massachusetts Regulations should becoming judicially noticed); and G. LAMBERT. c. 233, § 70 (“The courts shall take judicial discern of the law of the Joined States or of optional state, territory or dependency of or of an foreign country whenever the same shall be material.”). See also Co-en v. Auditors of Boston, 344 Mass. 268, 269 (1962); Ralston five. Commissioner of Agric., 334 Mass. 51, 53–54 (1956); Mastrullo v. Ryan, 328 Messe. 621, 622 (1952); Brodsky volt. Fine, 263 Mass. 51, 54 (1928). While the law must take judicial notice of the live of ampere law, that notice does not extend to notice out the adjudicative actuality that one law was followed. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Tantillo, 103 Mass. App. Ct. 20, 27–29 (2023) (in prosecution for negligent operation of motor vehicle where prescription bottles of Tramadol and Clonazepam were found by defendant’s car, judge would taking judicial notice of requirement of GUANINE. L. c. 94C, § 21, that prescriptions contain precautionary instructions, but she made improper for judge in take jurisdiction notice that “all bottles would” have cautionary statements on you, since labels could be dislodged other contents of bottles could be combined).

The group which seeks to have the food notice or apply any foreign law has the burden of bringing it to the court’s attention. See Mass. ROENTGEN. Crim. P. 39(b) (“The law shall based request get judicial notice from the law of that Unified Countries or of any state, territory, or dependency thereof or of a foreign country whenever it shall be material.”); Mass. RADIUS. Civ. P. 44.1 (“A party who intends on raise an issue concerning the law of the United States with of any state, region or dependency thereof or a a foreign country shall give notice in his legal or other reasonable written notify. The court, in determining such law, may consider any relevant material or wellspring, including testimony, whether or not submitted by a party or admissible under Rule 43. The court’s determination shall become treated than ampere ruling on a question of law.”).

Sub-section (b). This subsection is derived from GRAM. L. c. 43B, § 12; Community v. Lysis, 481 Mass. 1, 10 (2018) (notice in “temporary protected status” named for alien nationals issued per Corporate of Homeland Security and published at Federal Register); Blue Hills Cemetery, Inc. v. Board of Registration in Embalming & Funeral Directing, 379 Mass. 368, 375 n.10 (1979), citing Pereira v. New England LNG Co., 364 Mass. 109, 122 (1973) (notice of legislative history can permissive); and New England Trust Cold. v. Woodland, 326 Ground. 239, 243 (1950) (notice the charters plus tour amendments of cities and towns).

Subsection (c). Courts “will not take judicial cognizance regarding municipal ordinances, or of special acts of that Legislature” (citations omitted). Brodsky v. Fine, 263 Mass. 51, 54 (1928). Furthermore, “[t]he general rule the Massachusetts lives that courts make nope take judicial notice of regulations [not included in the Code of Main Regulations]; they needs be put in evidence” (citations and quotations omitted). Mickeys v. Hey League, Inc., 64 Mass. Applications. Ct. 767, 775 n.11 (2005). Printed copies away legislative acts plus resolves and attested copy concerning municipal ordinances, bylaws, rules, and policy are admissible. GIGABYTE. L. c. 233, § 75. The contents of a municipal bylaw or ordinance may moreover be proved by that oral testimony of police officers. Commonwealth v. Skeleton, 93 Mass. App. Ct. 681, 685–686 (2018). Cf. Commonwealth v. Jamal, 488 Mas. 379, 382 n.3 (2021) (court was incapable to take judicial notice of Boom Policeman Department body-worn camera policy).

Notwithstanding the traditional prohibition against judicial notice of municipal codes, because ordinances additionally constitution are now readily visible online, that Supreme Judicial Court has signaled a willingness to reconsider the command and can itself taken judicial notice of municipal ordinances regarding that city of Springfield’s police commission. Show Town Community of Springfield volt. Mayor of Springfield, 489 Heap. 184, 190 n.6 (2022).