Mass. Gen. Laws » Part III Title V Chapter 259
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 259, § 4 (2026)

Representation as to another's credit; necessity of writing

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

Section 4. No action shall be brought to charge a person upon or by reason of a representation or assurance made concerning the character, conduct, credit, ability, trade or dealings of any other person, unless such representation or assurance is made in writing and signed by the party to be charged thereby, or by some person thereunto by him lawfully authorized.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1925–2012 · leading case: Barrett Assocs., Inc. v. Aronson, 190 N.E.2d 867 (Mass. 1963).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Barrett Assocs., Inc. v. Aronson, 190 N.E.2d 867 (Mass. 1963). “74, § 4, the predecessor of G. L. c. 259, § 4. In an opinion containing a full discussion by Loring, J.”
Emery Corp. v. Century Bancorp., Inc., 588 F. Supp. 15 (D. Mass. 1984). · cites it 2× “The defendants have moved to dismiss the case on the basis that the Massachusetts Statute of Frauds, M.G.L. c. 259, § 4, bars all of the plaintiff’s claims.”
Brock & Davis Co., Inc. v. Charleston Nat. Bank, 443 F. Supp. 1175 (S.D.W. Va 1977). “33 § 53 (1964); Mass. Gen.Laws Ann. ch. 259 § 4 (West 1959); Mich.”
Des Brisay v. Foss, 162 N.E. 4 (Mass. 1928). “This order can be sustained only if there were no evidence which would support a verdict for the plaintiffs. There was evidence which would support findings that, before the plaintiffs formed the new corporation and before the time within which they might have renewed their…”
Cauman v. Biggar, 146 N.E. 230 (Mass. 1925). · cites it 2× “The defendants rely in their answers on the statute of frauds, G. L. c. 259, § 4, which provides: “No action shall be brought to charge a person upon or by reason of a representation or assurance made concerning the character, conduct, credit, ability, trade or dealings of any…”
Goebel v. Schmid Bros., Inc., 871 F. Supp. 68 (D. Mass. 1994). “M.G.L. c. 259 § 4. Because New York has no comparable statute, I turn first to the question whether I should apply New York or Massachusetts law.”
Laker v. Freid, 854 F. Supp. 923 (D. Mass. 1994). “The defendant relies on Mass.Gen.L. ch. 259, § 4 (1992), which provides as follows: No action shall be brought to charge a person upon or by reason of a representation or assurance made concerning the character, conduct, credit, ability, trade or dealings of any other person,…”
Bank of Com. & Trust Co. v. Schooner, 160 N.E. 790 (Mass. 1928). “The remaining question argued by the defendant is that the declaration alleges representations which are within the statute of frauds, G. L. c. 259, § 4, and for that reason the plaintiff is barred from recovery.”
Middlesex Cnty. Nat'l Bank v. Redd Auto Sales, Inc., 14 Mass. App. Dec. 6 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1957). · cites it 6× “d that the representations were made to the plaintiff by the defendant to meet the conditions and regulations of the plaintiff that one-third of the purchase price be paid down on a motor vehicle before they would consider financing the purchaser; that the representations were…”
M&I Bank, FSB v. Demarre Corp., 30 Mass. L. Rptr. 1 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2012). “Demarre argues that G.L.c. 259, Section 4 trumps the bank’s hand.”
James Cowan & Sons, Inc. v. Townline, Inc., 1981 Mass. App. Div. 66 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1981). “In addition, underM.G.L.c. 259, §4, it is clear that no action can be brought against a person for a representation or assurance made concerning the character, credit, or ability of another person unless that representation or assurance was in writing and signed by the party to…”
Davy. v. Livoli, 14 Mass. App. Div. 79 (1949). “G. L. c. 259, § 4. We cannot agree. While a promise to open a right of way has been held to concern an interest in land and is, therefore, unenforceable unless in writing.”
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.