Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258, § 9A (2026)

Actions against members of police force; indemnity

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 9A. If, in the event a suit is commenced against a member of the state police or an employee represented by state bargaining unit five, by reason of a claim for damages resulting from an alleged intentional tort or by reason of an alleged act or failure to act which constitutes a violation of the civil rights of any person under federal or state law, the commonwealth, at the request of the affected police officer, shall provide for the legal representation of said police officer.

The commonwealth shall indemnify members of the state police or an employee represented by state bargaining unit five, respectively, from all personal financial loss and expenses, including but not limited to legal fees and costs, if any, in an amount not to exceed one million dollars arising out of any claim, action, award, compromise, settlement or judgment resulting from any alleged intentional tort or by reason of an alleged act or failure to act which constitutes a violation of the civil rights of any person under federal or state law; provided, however, that this section shall apply only where such alleged intentional tort or alleged act or failure to act occurred within the scope of the official duties of such police officer.

No member of the state police or an employee represented by state bargaining unit five shall be indemnified for any violation of federal or state law if such member or employee acted in a wilful, wanton, or malicious manner.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 16 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1984–2025 · leading case: Maimaron v. Commonwealth, 865 N.E.2d 1098 (Mass. 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Maimaron v. Commonwealth, 865 N.E.2d 1098 (Mass. 2007). · cites it 17× “Unable to satisfy the judgment against him, Oxner entered a settlement agreement and assignment of rights with Maimaron in which Oxner assigned his right to Maimaron 2 to indemnification (of the judgment in the underlying action) by the Commonwealth pursuant to G. L. c. 258, §…”

Pinshaw v. Metro. Dist. Comm'n, 524 N.E.2d 1351 (Mass. 1988). · cites it 10× “653, [1] and G.L.c. 258, § 9A, added by St. 1982, c. 345.”

Rafferty v. Merck & Co., Inc., 92 N.E.3d 1205 (Mass. 2018). “258, § 9 (public employees may not be indemnified for civil rights violations if employee "acted in a grossly negligent, willful[,] or malicious manner); G. L. c. 258, § 9A (police officers may not be indemnified for violations of Federal or State law if officer "acted in a…”

Brown v. Off. of the Comm'r of Prob., 59 N.E.3d 1167 (Mass. 2016). · cites it 2× “In Maimaron, supra at 181 , we determined that waiver of sovereign immunity from liability for postjudgment interest likewise was implied necessarily by the language of G. L. c. 258, § 9A, which indemnifies police officers “from all personal financial loss and expenses,…”

Burke v. Commonwealth, 852 N.E.2d 122 (Mass. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 11× “This appeal from the grant of summary judgment for the defendants raises the question whether the Commonwealth has discretion to set the hourly rate of reimbursement for attorney’s fees to be recovered by a State trooper entitled to indemnification for legal fees pursuant to G.…”

Breault v. Chairman of Bd, Fire Commr. of Springfield, 513 N.E.2d 1277 (Mass. 1987). “G.L.c. 258, § 9A (1986 ed.). In contrast, intentional violations of civil rights are not subject to indemnification.”

Meola v. MacHado, 602 F. Supp. 3 (D. Mass. 1984). · cites it 3× “Therefore, the applicability of Eleventh Amendment immunity turns upon whether Officer Machado’s conduct falls within the protection of M.G.L. c. 258, § 9A. Arguing by analogy to federal civil rights statutes, the defendant asserts that the term “wilful” as used in M.”

Doe v. Town of Plymouth, 825 F. Supp. 1102 (D. Mass. 1993). “Mass. Gen.L. ch. 258, § 9A; see also Pinshaw v.”

Pinshaw v. Metro. Dist. Comm'n, 604 N.E.2d 1321 (Mass. App. Ct. 1992). “Given our decision, any analysis of the possible prejudicial effect of the judge’s instruction on the jury’s response to the scope of duty question would involve us in unnecessary speculation.”

City of Boston v. Boston Police Patrolmen's Ass'n, 717 N.E.2d 667 (Mass. App. Ct. 1999). “2 The arbitrator as part of his award ordered “[tjhat the [union]’s request for indemnification is granted to the extent that the proposal conforms to the State Police provision G.”

Breault v. Chairman of the Bd. of Fire Commissioners, 513 N.E.2d 1277 (Mass. 1987). “G. L. c. 258, § 9A (1986 ed.). In contrast, intentional violations of civil rights are not subject to indemnification.”

City of Sweetwater v. Alvarez, 14 So. 3d 1210 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009). “Although ours is not the only state that provides some means by which police officers and correctional officials may obtain reimbursement for legal expenses and costs, see, e.”

Show all 16 citing 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.