Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 231, § 93 (2026)

Retraction of libel; mitigation of damages; punitive damages

✓ text as last checked Sept. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 93. Where the defendant in an action for libel, at any time after the publication of the libel hereinafter referred to, either before or after such action is brought, but before the answer is required to be filed therein, gives written notice to the plaintiff or to his attorney of his intention to publish a retraction of the libel, accompanied by a copy of the retraction which he intends to publish, and the retraction is published, he may prove such publication, and, if the plaintiff does not accept the offer of retraction, the defendant may prove such nonacceptance in mitigation of damages. If within a reasonable time after receiving notice in writing from the plaintiff that he claims to be libelled the defendant makes such offer and publishes a reasonable retraction, and such offer is not accepted, he may prove that the alleged libel was published in good faith and without actual malice, and, unless the proof is successfully rebutted, the plaintiff shall recover only for any actual damage sustained. In no action of slander or libel shall exemplary or punitive damages be allowed, whether because of actual malice or want of good faith or for any other reason. Proof of actual malice shall not enhance the damages recoverable for injury to the plaintiff's reputation.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1966–2016 · leading case: Ravnikar v. Bogojavlensky, 782 N.E.2d 508 (Mass. 2003).
Ravnikar v. Bogojavlensky, 782 N.E.2d 508 (Mass. 2003). “G. L. c. 231, § 93. The plaintiff does not claim that the defendant’s remarks fall within any of the other exceptions to the economic harm requirement.”
Stone v. Essex Cnty. Newspapers, Inc., 330 N.E.2d 161 (Mass. 1975). · cites it 2× “G.L.c. 231, § 93, as appearing in St. 1943, c.”
Mandel v. Boston Phoenix, Inc., 456 F.3d 198 (1st Cir. 2006). “…as the standard for liability, and Massachusetts does not permit punitive damages in defamation actions. See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 231, § 93 .”
Alharbi v. Theblaze, Inc., 199 F. Supp. 3d 334 (D. Mass. 2016). “Mass. Gen. Laws. ch. 231 § 93; Stone v. Essex Cty.”
Tosti v. Ayik, 476 N.E.2d 928 (Mass. 1985). “G. L. c. 231, § 93. The plaintiff is entitled only to fair compensation for his actual damages, including his mental suffering and harm to his reputation, and for any special damages he has suffered which have been pleaded and proved.”
Dexter's Hearthside Restaurant, Inc. v. Whitehall Co., 508 N.E.2d 113 (Mass. App. Ct. 1987). “G. L. c. 231, § 93. Ellis v. Brockton Publishing Co.”
Sperry Rand Corp. v. William R. Hill, Jr., 356 F.2d 181 (1st Cir. 1966). · cites it 2× “G.L. c. 231, § 93. 3 . This meant only that defendant would approve their qualifications.”
Stone v. Essex Cnty. Newspapers, Inc., 311 N.E.2d 52 (Mass. 1974). · cites it 2× “G.L.c. 231, § 93, as appearing in St. 1943, c.”
Titan PRT Sys., Inc. v. Fabian, 6 Mass. L. Rptr. 345 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1997). “G.L.c. 231, §93. The New Jersey judge awarded $100,000.”
Tech Plus, Inc. v. Ansel, 9 Mass. L. Rptr. 671 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1999). “G.L.c. 231, §93. It is also true that the Supreme Judicial Court has held that, as a matter of constitutional law, a plaintiff in a defamation case is limited to actual damages, recognizing that allowing damage claims in excess of actual damages “may impermissibly chill the…”
Johnson v. Repub. Co., 1987 Mass. App. Div. 85 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1987). · cites it 2× “The defendant argues that G.L. c. 231, § 93 prohibits exemplary or punitive damages in libel cases.”
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.