Stay of Enforcement Request - Massachusetts

STAY OF ENFORCEMENT REQUEST — MASSACHUSETTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Stay Request Cover Letter
2. Formal Motion for Stay of Enforcement
3. Statement of Facts
4. Legal Standard for Stay
5. Grounds Analysis (Four-Factor Test)
6. Bond/Security Provisions
7. Emergency Stay Procedures
8. Opposition Response Template
9. Proposed Order
10. Appeal of Stay Denial
11. Document Checklist
12. Practice Tips
13. Sources and References

1. STAY REQUEST COVER LETTER

[__/__/____]

[________________________________]
[Agency Name]
[________________________________]
[Street Address]
[________________________________]
[City, State, ZIP Code]

Re: Request for Stay of Enforcement
Case/Docket No.: [________________________________]
In the Matter of: [________________________________]
Agency Order Dated: [__/__/____]

Dear [________________________________]:

Enclosed please find the Petitioner's Motion for Stay of Enforcement of the [________________________________] [Order/Decision/Final Action] dated [__/__/____] in the above-referenced matter, together with supporting memorandum, affidavit(s), and proposed order.

Petitioner [________________________________] respectfully requests that the [Agency Name] stay enforcement of the above-referenced [Order/Decision] pending [☐ administrative appeal / ☐ judicial review in the Superior Court / ☐ reconsideration]. This request is made pursuant to M.G.L. c. 30A, § 14 and [________________________________] [applicable agency regulation].

Petitioner requests that this motion be considered [☐ on an expedited basis / ☐ on the regular motion calendar / ☐ on an emergency basis] due to [________________________________].

Respectfully submitted,

[________________________________]
Attorney for Petitioner
BBO No.: [________________________________]
[________________________________]
[Firm Name]
[________________________________]
[Address]
[________________________________]
[Phone / Email]

2. FORMAL MOTION FOR STAY OF ENFORCEMENT

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

Before the [________________________________]
[Agency Name]

In the Matter of:

[________________________________]
Petitioner,

Docket No.: [________________________________]

PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR STAY OF ENFORCEMENT PENDING [APPEAL/JUDICIAL REVIEW]

NOW COMES Petitioner [________________________________], by and through undersigned counsel, and respectfully moves this [Agency/Honorable Court] for an order staying enforcement of the [Order/Decision/Final Action] dated [__/__/____] pending [☐ reconsideration / ☐ administrative appeal / ☐ judicial review pursuant to M.G.L. c. 30A, § 14]. In support of this Motion, Petitioner states as follows:

I. INTRODUCTION

1. On [__/__/____], the [Agency Name] issued a [Final Order/Decision/Enforcement Action] in the above-captioned matter ordering [________________________________].

2. Petitioner has [☐ filed / ☐ intends to file within the statutory period] a [☐ petition for reconsideration / ☐ petition for judicial review / ☐ notice of appeal] challenging the [Order/Decision] on [__/__/____].

3. Absent a stay, the [Order/Decision] will take effect on [__/__/____], causing immediate and irreparable harm to Petitioner as described herein.

4. This Motion is filed pursuant to:
   - ☐ M.G.L. c. 30A, § 14 (agency or court authority to stay enforcement)
   - ☐ [________________________________] [Agency-specific regulation authorizing stay]
   - ☐ Mass. R. App. P. 6 (if appeal pending)
   - ☐ Inherent equitable power of the court

3. STATEMENT OF FACTS

A. Background of the Proceeding

5. Petitioner is a [________________________________] [individual/entity] located at [________________________________], engaged in [________________________________].

6. On or about [__/__/____], the [Agency Name] initiated [________________________________] [enforcement action/investigation/proceedings] against Petitioner concerning [________________________________].

7. The following proceedings occurred:

B. The Agency Order

8. The [Order/Decision] requires Petitioner to:
   - ☐ [________________________________]
   - ☐ [________________________________]
   - ☐ [________________________________]
   - ☐ Pay a fine/penalty of $[________________________________]

9. The enforcement date is [__/__/____], which is [____] days from the date of this Motion.

C. Compliance Efforts and Current Status

10. Since the issuance of the [Order/Decision], Petitioner has:
    - ☐ [________________________________]
    - ☐ [________________________________]
    - ☐ [________________________________]

4. LEGAL STANDARD FOR STAY

A. Statutory Authority — M.G.L. c. 30A, § 14

11. Under Massachusetts law, "the commencement of an action [for judicial review] shall not operate as a stay of enforcement of the agency decision." M.G.L. c. 30A, § 14. However, the statute provides two avenues for obtaining a stay:

(a) Agency Stay: The agency itself may stay enforcement of its own decision pending judicial review.

(b) Court Stay: The reviewing court "may order a stay upon such terms as it considers proper." M.G.L. c. 30A, § 14.

12. Filing a petition for judicial review does not create an automatic stay in Massachusetts. The petitioner must affirmatively seek a stay from either the agency or the Superior Court.

B. Four-Factor Test for Stay

13. Massachusetts courts apply the traditional four-factor test for stays of agency enforcement actions, consistent with the standard articulated in Packaging Industries Group, Inc. v. Cheney, 380 Mass. 609 (1980), and analogous to the federal standard:

(1) Likelihood of success on the merits;
(2) Whether the petitioner will suffer irreparable harm absent a stay;
(3) Whether the balance of hardships favors the petitioner; and
(4) Whether a stay serves the public interest.

14. The court has broad discretion in weighing these factors, and a particularly strong showing on one factor may compensate for a lesser showing on another. See Student No. 9 v. Board of Education, 440 Mass. 752, 762 (2004).

C. Agency-Specific Provisions

15. The following agency-specific regulation(s) govern stay requests in this matter:
    - ☐ [________________________________] [Citation to specific agency regulation]
    - ☐ 801 CMR 1.01(7) (Standard Adjudicatory Rules of Practice and Procedure)
    - ☐ [________________________________]

5. GROUNDS ANALYSIS (FOUR-FACTOR TEST)

Factor 1: Likelihood of Success on the Merits

16. Petitioner has a strong likelihood of success on the merits because:

Legal Errors in the Agency Decision:

• ☐ The agency applied the wrong legal standard by [________________________________]
• ☐ The agency exceeded its statutory authority under [________________________________]
• ☐ The agency failed to follow required procedures, specifically [________________________________]
• ☐ The decision is not supported by substantial evidence because [________________________________]
• ☐ The decision is arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion because [________________________________]

Specific Grounds:

(a) [________________________________]
[Detailed argument on first ground for relief]

(b) [________________________________]
[Detailed argument on second ground for relief]

(c) [________________________________]
[Detailed argument on third ground for relief]

17. Under M.G.L. c. 30A, § 14(7), the reviewing court may set aside or modify the agency decision if it determines the rights of any party have been prejudiced because the agency decision is:
    - ☐ In violation of constitutional provisions
    - ☐ In excess of the statutory authority or jurisdiction of the agency
    - ☐ Based upon an error of law
    - ☐ Made upon unlawful procedure
    - ☐ Unsupported by substantial evidence
    - ☐ Unwarranted by facts found by the court on the evidence presented
    - ☐ Arbitrary or capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law

Factor 2: Irreparable Harm

18. Absent a stay, Petitioner will suffer irreparable harm that cannot be remedied through monetary damages or other adequate legal remedy:

• ☐ License Revocation/Suspension: Loss of [________________________________] license effective [__/__/____], preventing Petitioner from [________________________________]
• ☐ Business Closure: Forced cessation of operations at [________________________________], resulting in [________________________________]
• ☐ Financial Devastation: Immediate obligation to pay $[________________________________], which will [________________________________]
• ☐ Reputational Harm: Public disclosure of enforcement action causing irreversible damage to [________________________________]
• ☐ Loss of Employment: Inability to continue employment as [________________________________]
• ☐ Loss of Unique Property/Rights: [________________________________]
• ☐ Other: [________________________________]

19. These harms are irreparable because: [________________________________]

20. The imminence of the harm is demonstrated by: [________________________________]

Factor 3: Balance of Hardships

21. The balance of hardships tips decidedly in Petitioner's favor:

Harm to Petitioner Without Stay:

• ☐ [________________________________]
• ☐ [________________________________]
• ☐ [________________________________]

Harm to Agency/Respondent/Public With Stay:

• ☐ [________________________________]
• ☐ [________________________________]

22. The harm to Petitioner far outweighs any potential harm to the Agency or other parties because: [________________________________]

23. Conditions that would mitigate potential harm during the stay include:
    - ☐ [________________________________]
    - ☐ [________________________________]

Factor 4: Public Interest

24. A stay of enforcement serves the public interest because:

• ☐ The public is served by maintaining the status quo pending full review of the agency action
• ☐ Allowing premature enforcement would undermine confidence in the administrative process
• ☐ The Petitioner provides services to the public, including [________________________________]
• ☐ Enforcement would result in harm to third parties, including [________________________________]
• ☐ Public interest favors careful adjudication on the merits before enforcement of penalties
• ☐ [________________________________]

25. The public interest is not harmed by a stay because: [________________________________]

6. BOND/SECURITY PROVISIONS

A. Bond Offer

26. Petitioner [☐ is prepared to / ☐ requests waiver of requirement to] post a bond or security to protect the interests of the Agency and any other affected parties during the stay period.

Proposed Bond/Security:

• ☐ Cash bond in the amount of $[________________________________]
• ☐ Surety bond in the amount of $[________________________________]
• ☐ Irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of $[________________________________]
• ☐ Escrow deposit in the amount of $[________________________________]
• ☐ Other security: [________________________________]

B. Basis for Bond Amount

27. The proposed bond amount is appropriate because: [________________________________]

C. Request for Waiver or Reduction

28. ☐ Petitioner requests that no bond be required because:
    - ☐ The agency action does not involve a monetary obligation
    - ☐ Petitioner is indigent and bond would effectively deny the right to appeal
    - ☐ Petitioner is a governmental entity
    - ☐ The risk of harm to the opposing party during the stay is minimal
    - ☐ [________________________________]

D. Proposed Conditions

29. Petitioner proposes the following conditions during the stay period:
    - ☐ [________________________________]
    - ☐ [________________________________]
    - ☐ [________________________________]
    - ☐ Petitioner will comply with all other agency requirements not subject to this stay
    - ☐ Petitioner will provide periodic status reports to the [Agency/Court]

7. EMERGENCY STAY PROCEDURES

A. Emergency Motion for Temporary Stay

When Standard Timelines Are Insufficient:

30. If enforcement is imminent and the regular motion schedule does not permit adequate review, Petitioner may seek an emergency temporary stay.

Requirements for Emergency Stay Under Massachusetts Practice:

• ☐ Show that immediate and irreparable injury will occur before the motion can be heard on the regular calendar
• ☐ Demonstrate good faith effort to notify opposing counsel/agency
• ☐ Explain why the emergency was not foreseeable or could not have been addressed sooner
• ☐ Present sufficient evidence (by affidavit) to support the request

B. Procedure for Emergency Stay

31. Step 1 — Agency Request: Unless impracticable, request an emergency stay from the agency first:
    - Contact: [________________________________]
    - Method: [☐ Written motion / ☐ Telephone followed by written confirmation]
    - Date of request: [__/__/____]
    - Agency response: [☐ Granted / ☐ Denied / ☐ No response within [____] hours]

32. Step 2 — Court Emergency Motion: If agency relief is unavailable or denied:
    - File motion in the Superior Court where judicial review is pending
    - Include certification that agency relief was sought and denied/unavailable
    - Request hearing on shortest practicable notice
    - Contact the session clerk or duty judge as appropriate

33. Step 3 — Ex Parte Relief (Extraordinary Circumstances Only):
    - Available only where notice to the agency is not practicable
    - Must demonstrate threatened irreparable injury before notice can be given
    - Any ex parte stay is temporary and must be followed by a prompt hearing

C. Emergency Affidavit

34. Petitioner's emergency affidavit must include:
    - ☐ Facts establishing the nature and imminence of irreparable harm
    - ☐ Efforts made to obtain relief from the agency
    - ☐ Reasons why regular motion procedures are insufficient
    - ☐ Good faith certification regarding notice to opposing parties

8. OPPOSITION RESPONSE TEMPLATE

AGENCY'S/RESPONDENT'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR STAY

NOW COMES the [Agency Name/Respondent], and opposes Petitioner's Motion for Stay of Enforcement as follows:

I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

35. [________________________________]

II. ARGUMENT

A. Petitioner Has Not Demonstrated a Likelihood of Success on the Merits

36. [________________________________]

B. Petitioner Will Not Suffer Irreparable Harm

37. [________________________________]

C. The Balance of Hardships Favors the Agency

38. [________________________________]

D. The Public Interest Requires Enforcement

39. [________________________________]

III. ALTERNATIVE CONDITIONS

40. In the event the [Court/Agency] is inclined to grant a stay, the Agency requests the following conditions:
    - ☐ Bond in the amount of $[________________________________]
    - ☐ [________________________________]
    - ☐ Time limitation of [________________________________]
    - ☐ [________________________________]

IV. CONCLUSION

41. For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner's Motion for Stay should be denied.

Respectfully submitted,

[________________________________]
Counsel for [Agency/Respondent]
BBO No.: [________________________________]
Date: [__/__/____]

9. PROPOSED ORDER

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

Before the [________________________________]
[Superior Court, [____] Division / Agency Name]

In the Matter of:

[________________________________], Petitioner

Docket No.: [________________________________]

ORDER ON PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR STAY OF ENFORCEMENT

Upon consideration of Petitioner's Motion for Stay of Enforcement, the supporting memorandum, affidavit(s), and [☐ the Agency's opposition / ☐ without opposition], it is hereby:

ORDERED that:

☐ STAY GRANTED. Enforcement of the [Order/Decision] dated [__/__/____] is stayed pending [☐ the conclusion of judicial review proceedings / ☐ reconsideration / ☐ further order of this Court/Agency], subject to the following conditions:

(a) [________________________________]
(b) [________________________________]
(c) Petitioner shall post a bond in the amount of $[________________________________] within [____] days of this Order.
(d) This stay shall remain in effect until [__/__/____] or until further order of this [Court/Agency], whichever occurs first.
(e) [________________________________]

☐ STAY DENIED. Petitioner's Motion for Stay is denied for the following reason(s):
[________________________________]

☐ STAY GRANTED IN PART. [________________________________]

Date: [__/__/____]

___________________________________
[Name]
[Title: Judge / Administrative Hearing Officer / Commissioner]

10. APPEAL OF STAY DENIAL

A. Agency Denial — Seeking Court Relief

42. If the agency denies the stay request, Petitioner may seek a stay from the Superior Court. The motion to the court must include:

• ☐ Copy of the petition for judicial review (if already filed)
• ☐ Copy of the stay request submitted to the agency
• ☐ Copy of the agency's denial (or evidence of constructive denial/failure to act)
• ☐ Statement of reasons the agency gave for denial
• ☐ Renewed argument on the four-factor test
• ☐ Supporting affidavits

B. Superior Court Denial — Appellate Relief

43. If the Superior Court denies the stay, Petitioner may seek relief by:

• ☐ Filing a motion for reconsideration with the Superior Court
• ☐ Seeking interlocutory appellate review under M.G.L. c. 231, § 118 (first paragraph)
• ☐ Filing a petition under Mass. R. App. P. 6 with the Appeals Court
• ☐ In extraordinary circumstances, filing a petition for relief with a Single Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court under M.G.L. c. 211, § 3

C. Timing Considerations

44. Key deadlines for Massachusetts administrative appeals:

11. DOCUMENT CHECKLIST

Required Documents for Stay Request

For Agency-Level Stay:

• ☐ Motion for Stay of Enforcement
• ☐ Memorandum in support of stay
• ☐ Affidavit(s) in support (establishing irreparable harm and supporting facts)
• ☐ Copy of the agency Order/Decision at issue
• ☐ Proposed Order
• ☐ Certificate of service on all parties
• ☐ Copy of petition for appeal/reconsideration (if filed)

For Court-Level Stay (Superior Court):

• ☐ Motion for Stay of Enforcement
• ☐ Memorandum of law in support
• ☐ Affidavit(s) in support
• ☐ Copy of petition for judicial review (M.G.L. c. 30A, § 14)
• ☐ Copy of agency stay request and denial (if applicable)
• ☐ Copy of the certified administrative record (if available)
• ☐ Copy of the agency Order/Decision at issue
• ☐ Proposed Order granting stay
• ☐ Bond or proposed bond/security (if applicable)
• ☐ Certificate of service on all parties and the Attorney General
• ☐ Civil action cover sheet

For Emergency Stay:

• ☐ All documents listed above, plus:
• ☐ Emergency affidavit establishing imminence of harm
• ☐ Certification of efforts to provide notice to opposing parties
• ☐ Certification of efforts to obtain relief from the agency
• ☐ Request for expedited hearing

12. PRACTICE TIPS

Massachusetts-Specific Considerations

Timing Strategy:

• File the stay request with the agency immediately upon receiving the adverse decision — do not wait until filing the petition for judicial review
• M.G.L. c. 30A, § 14 imposes a 30-day deadline for filing a petition for judicial review from the date of notice of the final decision
• Consider filing the agency stay request and the Superior Court petition simultaneously to preserve all options

Agency-Level Considerations:

• Each Massachusetts agency may have its own procedures for stay requests — check agency-specific regulations before filing
• The Division of Administrative Law Appeals (DALA) and specific agencies such as the Department of Environmental Protection, Board of Registration, and Department of Public Utilities have distinct procedural rules
• 801 CMR 1.01 (Standard Adjudicatory Rules) governs proceedings before many state agencies

Court-Level Strategy:

• Judicial review of agency decisions is filed in Superior Court for the county where the petitioner resides or has a principal place of business, or in Suffolk County
• The court reviews the administrative record — build a strong record during the agency proceedings
• Affidavits supporting irreparable harm should be detailed, specific, and supported by documentary evidence
• Consider whether a temporary restraining order (TRO) under Mass. R. Civ. P. 65 is an alternative or complement to a stay under c. 30A

Bond Considerations:

• Massachusetts courts have broad discretion to set bond terms under M.G.L. c. 30A, § 14
• If the case involves a monetary penalty, expect the agency to request a bond in the full amount of the penalty
• Argue for a reduced bond if the petitioner can demonstrate financial hardship or if the full bond would effectively deny the right to appeal
• Mass. R. App. P. 6(e) governs bond requirements on appeals from the Superior Court

Common Pitfalls:

• Failure to exhaust agency remedies before seeking court relief
• Filing the stay request after enforcement has already occurred
• Inadequate affidavit support for irreparable harm claims
• Failure to serve the Attorney General's office in actions involving state agencies
• Missing the 30-day deadline for filing a petition for judicial review

License Cases:

• For professional license cases, enforcement of a suspension or revocation during appeal can cause severe irreparable harm — emphasize loss of livelihood
• Under M.G.L. c. 30A, § 14, the court may impose interim conditions on a license holder (e.g., supervised practice, restricted scope) as an alternative to a full stay or full enforcement
• Board of Registration decisions are commonly subject to stay requests

13. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

Statutes

• M.G.L. c. 30A, § 14 — Judicial Review of Agency Decisions; Stay Provisions
• M.G.L. c. 30A, §§ 1-17 — Massachusetts Administrative Procedure Act (full chapter)
• M.G.L. c. 231, § 6G — Supersedeas Bond
• M.G.L. c. 211, § 3 — Superintendence Power of the Supreme Judicial Court

Court Rules

• Mass. R. App. P. 6 — Stay or Injunction Pending Appeal
• Mass. R. Civ. P. 65 — Injunctions (TRO/Preliminary Injunction)
• Superior Court Standing Order 1-96 — Practices for Administrative Agency Appeals
• 801 CMR 1.01 — Standard Adjudicatory Rules of Practice and Procedure

Key Cases

• Packaging Industries Group, Inc. v. Cheney, 380 Mass. 609 (1980) — Four-factor preliminary injunction standard
• Student No. 9 v. Board of Education, 440 Mass. 752 (2004) — Balancing equitable factors
• Tri-Nel Management, Inc. v. Board of Health, 433 Mass. 217 (2001) — Judicial review of agency decisions

Practice Resources

• Massachusetts Practice Series, Administrative Law and Practice (Thomson West)
• Massachusetts Superior Court Administrative Appeals Practice Guide
• Massachusetts Bar Association, Administrative Law Section Resources

This template is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Massachusetts administrative law procedures vary significantly by agency and subject matter. Consult a qualified Massachusetts attorney before filing any stay request. Last updated: 2026-03-08.