Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 266, § 37 (2026)

Fraudulent checks, etc.; drawing or uttering

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 37. Whoever, with intent to defraud, makes, draws, utters or delivers any check, draft or order for the payment of money upon any bank or other depositary, with knowledge that the maker or drawer has not sufficient funds or credit at such bank or other depositary for the payment of such instrument, although no express representation is made in reference thereto, shall be guilty of attempted larceny, and if money or property or services are obtained thereby shall be guilty of larceny. As against the maker or drawer thereof, the making, drawing, uttering or delivery of such a check, draft or order, payment of which is refused by the drawee, shall be prima facie evidence of intent to defraud and of knowledge of insufficient funds in, or credit with, such bank or other depositary, unless the maker or drawer shall have paid the holder thereof the amount due thereon, together with all costs and protest fees, within two days after receiving notice that such check, draft or order has not been paid by the drawee. The word ''credit'', as used herein, shall be construed to mean an arrangement or understanding with the bank or depositary for the payment of such check, draft or order.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 19 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1977–2023 · leading case: Wenger v. Aceto, 883 N.E.2d 262 (Mass. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Wenger v. Aceto, 883 N.E.2d 262 (Mass. 2008). · cites it 6× “218, § 35A, in the Dedham Division of the District Court Department, against the plaintiff for larceny by check, G. L. c. 266, § 37. 3 The defendant’s application was considered by a clerk-magistrate of the District Court, who, after an evidentiary hearing, determined that there…”

Victory Distributors, Inc. v. Ayer Div. of the Dist. Court Dep't, 755 N.E.2d 273 (Mass. 2001). · cites it 3× “It alleged that these customers had committed larceny by check under G. L. c. 266, § 37. A The Ayer court. Between April and August, 1999, Victory filed fifty applications for criminal complaints in the Ayer court.”

Commonwealth v. Klein, 509 N.E.2d 265 (Mass. 1987). · cites it 6× “The charge stemmed from the defendant's purchase on June 7, 1983, of $79.71 worth of merchandise from a Zayre department store by means of a check that was returned for lack of sufficient funds.”

Commonwealth v. Littles, 80 N.E.3d 300 (Mass. 2017). · cites it 2× “” The instruction stems from G. L. c. 266, § 37, which designates the failure to make the required payment on the bad check within two days of notice as “prima facie evidence” of the defendant’s intent and knowledge.”

Commonwealth v. Dunnington, 457 N.E.2d 1109 (Mass. 1983). · cites it 3× “On September 16, 1981, the defendant, Richard Dunnington, was convicted of larceny by check under G. L. c. 266, § 37, at a bench trial in the Wareham District Court.”

Adelson v. DiPaola, 131 F.3d 259 (1st Cir. 1997). “To make a tedious tale tolerably terse, Eisner and Meyers eventually called the three dishonored checks to the attention of the Massachusetts authorities.”

Commonwealth v. Ohanian, 370 N.E.2d 695 (Mass. 1977). · cites it 3× “Each of the defendants was convicted on two counts of larceny under G. L. c. 266, § 37, 2 for obtaining money by means of checks drawn against insufficient funds.”

Commonwealth v. Adelson, 666 N.E.2d 167 (Mass. App. Ct. 1996). · cites it 3× “See G. L. c. 266, § 37. 1 Before the trial began, the defendant moved to dismiss the complaint because (1) the court lacked territorial jurisdiction and (2) venue was improperly laid in Middlesex County.”

Commonwealth v. Bonilla, 89 Mass. App. Ct. 263 (Mass. App. Ct. 2016). · cites it 2× “309, 314 (1987) (conviction of larceny pursuant to G. L. c. 266, § 37, affirmed where inference of intent to defraud and knowledge of insufficient funds permissible from maker of returned check’s failure to cure within two days).”

Ruckbi v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 159 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 1998). “Specifically, the IJ found that Ruckbi admitted the commission of the essential elements of larceny by check under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 266 § 37; larceny of property over $250 under Mass.”

Commonwealth v. Higgins, 503 N.E.2d 1326 (Mass. App. Ct. 1987). “266, § 30; (2) larceny by check, G. L. c. 266, § 37; (3) larceny of property $100 dollars or less, G.”

Commonwealth v. Goren, 893 N.E.2d 786 (Mass. App. Ct. 2008). · cites it 2× “See G. L. c. 266, § 37. On appeal, the defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his convic *679 tion as matter of law, arguing that a conviction on that charge may not rest on checks tendered in satisfaction of an antecedent debt.”

Show all 19 citing cases →

— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 266, § 37(C)(c) — 1 case

Commonwealth v. Lacroix, 25 Mass. L. Rptr. 161 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2009).

— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 266, § 37(j) — 1 case

Commonwealth v. Lacroix, 25 Mass. L. Rptr. 161 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2009).

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.