Mass. Gen. Laws » Part III Title II Chapter 231
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 231, § 91 (2026)

Effect of unproved defense of truth in action of slander or libel; proof of statements not contained in pleadings

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 91. In an action of slander or libel, if the defendant alleges that the words spoken or published were true, such allegation, although not supported by the evidence, shall not of itself be proof of the malice alleged in the complaint, nor shall statements of the defendant differing in import from those alleged be admissible to establish his malice unless such statements were published in pursuance of a general scheme to defame or otherwise injure the plaintiff. If the plaintiff proposes to introduce evidence of statements of the defendant other than those contained in his pleadings, he shall give the defendant written notice of such intention, specifying the date and content of each such statement, at least fourteen days before trial begins, or earlier if the court so orders; and, if any such statement is introduced in evidence, the defendant shall be permitted to prove that it was true, or was privileged, or any other facts relating thereto which tend to negative malice.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1979–1988 · leading case: Kipp v. Kueker, 386 N.E.2d 1282 (Mass. App. Ct. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kipp v. Kueker, 386 N.E.2d 1282 (Mass. App. Ct. 1979). “4 Most of the motions also asserted as an alternative ground for dismissal that the claims failed to comply with G. L. c. 231, § 91, as appearing in St. 1973, c.”
St. Clair v. Trs. of Boston Univ., 521 N.E.2d 1044 (Mass. App. Ct. 1988). “We need not reach the issue raised under G. L. c. 231, § 91, in connection with the count for slander, as the $20,000 *671 verdict may stand on the intentional interference with advantageous relations claim alone.”
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.