Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 266, § 52 (2026)

Bank officers and employees; fraud or embezzlement

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 52. An officer, director, trustee, agent or employee of a bank, as defined in section one of chapter one hundred and sixty-seven, who fraudulently converts, or fraudulently takes and secretes with intent so to do, any bullion, money, note, bill or other security for money which belongs to and is in possession of such bank, or which belongs to any person and is deposited therein, shall, whether intrusted with the custody thereof or not, be guilty of larceny from said bank. Any such officer, director, trustee, agent or employee so guilty of larceny and any person who knowingly aids, counsels or procures such larceny to be committed shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than fifteen years, or by a fine of not more than two thousand dollars and imprisonment in jail for not more than two and one half years.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1988–2014 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Labadie, 3 N.E.3d 1093 (Mass. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. Labadie, 3 N.E.3d 1093 (Mass. 2014). · cites it 9× “The issue presented in this case, before the court on further appellate review, is whether an employee of a credit union “authorized by federal law” may be found guilty under G. L. c. 266, § 52 (§ 52), of embezzlement of the credit union’s funds, and, if not, whether the…”

Commonwealth v. Labadie, 972 N.E.2d 66 (Mass. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 7× “4 A jury convicted Carcieri of embezzlement from a bank by a bank employee, G. L. c. 266, § 52, and Labadie as a joint venturer.”

Commonwealth v. Mulica, 520 N.E.2d 134 (Mass. 1988). “The defendant was convicted of embezzlement from the Newburyport Five Cents Savings Bank (bank), of procuring a bank employee fraudulently to convert money of the bank, and of aiding that bank employee to falsify bank rec *813 ords, in violation of G. L. c. 266, §§ 52 and 53A…”

Commonwealth v. Dunphy, 2 Mass. L. Rptr. 450 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1994). “§656 , whose language is much broader than that of G.L.c. 266, §§52 and 53A, the court did not rely on that broad language but instead decided the case on the narrow definition of agency.”

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.