Massachusetts General Laws
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 152, § 27 (2026)
Willful misconduct of employee
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MAmalegislature.gov (official)
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Section 27. If the employee is injured by reason of his serious and wilful misconduct, he shall not receive compensation; but this provision shall not bar compensation to his dependents if the injury results in death.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1927–2018 · leading case: Chervin v. Travelers Ins., 858 N.E.2d 746 (Mass. 2006).
Chervin v. Travelers Ins., 858 N.E.2d 746 (Mass. 2006). “Throughout that time, the defendant argued that Mosher’s injuries were not work related because the accident had occurred on his way to a medical appointment, and it asserted a defense under G. L. c. 152, § 27, claiming that Mosher’s injuries were the result of his own wilful…”
Dartt v. Browning-Ferris Indus., Inc., 691 N.E.2d 526 (Mass. 1998). “Dartt responded that the workers’ compensation statute exempts an employer from paying benefits to an employee who is injured because of his own “serious and wilful misconduct,” G. L. c. 152, § 27, and that BFI could have defended against any claim on that basis.”
D'Angeli's Case, 343 N.E.2d 368 (Mass. 1976). “We are also in agreement with the reviewing board that while the employee may have exercised poor judgment in going out onto Route 93 this did not amount to “serious and wilful misconduct” so as to bar compensation under G. L. c. 152, § 27. Most particularly are we of this view…”
Panagotopulos's Case, 177 N.E. 800 (Mass. 1931). “There was no evidence that the outbreak of dermatitis from which the employee was suffering immediately before November 6, 1930, was fully cured on that date.”
Caron's Case, 221 N.E.2d 871 (Mass. 1966). “See G. L. c. 152, § 27. The decree is affirmed.”
Bator's Case, 153 N.E.2d 765 (Mass. 1958). “G. L. c. 152, § 27, as amended through St.”
Silver's Case, 157 N.E. 342 (Mass. 1927). “” *224 The insurer contends that G. L. c. 152, § 27: “If the employee is injured by reason of his serious and wilful misconduct, he shall not receive compensation,” precludes recovery here.”
Morris's Case, 238 N.E.2d 35 (Mass. 1968). “G. L. c. 152, § 27. The inference drawn by the reviewing board that the decedent had decided to employ the elevator is not unreasonable in view of ample evidence in the transcript that William and other employees frequently used the elevator for travel from one floor to another.”
Garnhum's Case, 202 N.E.2d 255 (Mass. 1964). “The employer relies on G. L. c. 152, § 27, which provides that “If the employee is injured by reason of his serious and wilful misconduct, he shall not receive compensation.”
Pearson's Case, 170 N.E.2d 917 (Mass. 1960). “Moreover, if “the deceased assumed a hazard because he may have been in violation” of § 15, such “was not one assumed outside the scope” of his employment, and “even if the deceased’s conduct could conceivably have been found to be serious and wilful’ ’ compensation would not be…”
In re Thomas E. Yahoub's Case, 107 N.E.3d 1255 (Mass. App. Ct. 2018). “The insurer, Massachusetts Interlocal Insurance Association, 3 argued, inter alia, that the employee was not entitled to benefits because (1) his actions constituted serious and wilful misconduct under G. L. c. 152, § 27 ; and (2) his firing was a bona fide personnel action…”
Cox v. Saf. Ins., 1996 Mass. App. Div. 211 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1996). “Thus, G.L.c. 152, §27 denies workers’ compensation “[i]f the employee is injured by reason of his serious and wilful misconduct .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.