Mass. Gen. Laws » Part IV Title I Chapter 268A
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 268A, § 3 (2026)

Gifts, offers or promises for acts performed or to be performed; corruption of witnesses; solicitation of gifts; witness fees; regulations

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

Section 3. (a) Whoever knowingly, otherwise than as provided by law for the proper discharge of official duty, directly or indirectly, gives, offers or promises anything of substantial value to any present or former state, county or municipal employee or to any member of the judiciary, or to any person selected to be such an employee or member of the judiciary: (i) for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such an employee or member of the judiciary or person selected to be such an employee or member of the judiciary; or (ii) to influence, or attempt to influence, an official action of the state, county or municipal employee or to any member of the judiciary; or

(b) Whoever knowingly, being a present or former state, county or municipal employee or member of the judiciary, or person selected to be such an employee or member of the judiciary, otherwise than as provided by law for the proper discharge of official duty, directly or indirectly, asks, demands, exacts, solicits, seeks, accepts, receives or agrees to receive anything of substantial value: (i) for himself for or because of any official act or act within his official responsibility performed or to be performed by him; or (ii) to influence, or attempt to influence, him in an official act taken; or

(c) Whoever knowingly, directly or indirectly, gives, offers or promises anything of substantial value to any person, for or because of testimony under oath or affirmation given or to be given by such person or any other person as a witness upon a trial, hearing or other proceeding, before any court, any committee of either house or both houses of the general court, or any agency, commission or officer authorized by the laws of the commonwealth to hear evidence or take testimony or for or because of his absence therefrom; or

(d) Whoever knowingly, directly or indirectly, asks, demands, exacts, solicits, seeks, accepts, receives or agrees to receive anything of substantial value for himself for or because of the testimony under oath or affirmation given or to be given by him or any other person as a witness upon any such trial, hearing or other proceeding, or for or because of his absence therefrom; shall be punished by a fine of not more than $50,000, or by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 5 years, or in a jail or house of correction for not more than 2 1/2 years, or both.

(e) Clauses (c) and (d) shall not prohibit the payment or receipt of witness fees provided by law or the payment by the party upon whose behalf a witness is called and receipt by a witness of the reasonable cost of travel and subsistence incurred and the reasonable value of time lost in attendance at any such trial, hearing or proceeding, or, in the case of expert witnesses, involving a technical or professional opinion, a reasonable fee for time spent in the preparation of such opinion, in appearing or testifying.

(f) The state ethics commission shall adopt regulations: (i) defining ''substantial value,''; provided, however, that ''substantial value'' shall not be less than $50; (ii) establishing exclusions for ceremonial gifts; (iii) establishing exclusions for gifts given solely because of family or friendship; and (iv) establishing additional exclusions for other situations that do not present a genuine risk of a conflict or the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1965–2023 · leading case: United States v. Sawyer, 85 F.3d 713 (1st Cir. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Sawyer, 85 F.3d 713 (1st Cir. 1996). · cites it 10× “268B, § 6 (the “gift” statute), which prohibits — under threat of civil penal *726 ties—a “legislative agent” from offering or giving to a public official (or an official’s acceptance of) “gifts” aggregating $100 or more per year; and (2) Mass. Gen. L. ch. 268A, § 3 (the…”
United States v. Woodward, 149 F.3d 46 (1st Cir. 1998). · cites it 5× “, that they were given ‘for or because of any official act,’ within the meaning of the Massachusetts gratuity statute, Mass. Gen. L. ch. 268A, § 3.”). The same inferences regarding Woodward’s intent can be drawn from the evidence here, based upon the nature and sequences of…”
United States v. Sawyer, 878 F. Supp. 279 (D. Mass. 1995). · cites it 12× “§ 1952 , to wit, traveling and causing others to travel in interstate commerce with the intent to commit bribery in violation of M.G.L. c. 268A, § 3, the Massachusetts unlawful gratuities statute.”
Commonwealth v. Miranda, 934 N.E.2d 222 (Mass. 2010). · cites it 3× “He also contends that the testimony was procured unethically and in violation of the gratuity statute, G. L. c. 268A, § 3 (c) and (d). Consequently, the defendant seeks a new trial in which the testimony of Andrade and Rodriguez would be excluded.”
United States v. Ferber, 966 F. Supp. 90 (D. Mass. 1997). · cites it 9× “11 The jury convicted Ferber of all the charged Travel Act Counts predicated on violations of the Massachusetts gratuity statute, Mass.Gen.L. ch. 268A, § 3. Prior to sentencing, however, this Court, sua sponte, dismissed those counts for the reasons discussed herein.”
Scaccia v. State Ethics Comm'n, 727 N.E.2d 824 (Mass. 2000). · cites it 6× “Scaccia violated the gratuity statute, G. L. c. 268A, § 3 (b)\ the gift statute, G.”
United States v. Sawyer, 74 F. Supp. 2d 88 (D. Mass. 1999). · cites it 7× “§§ 1341 , 1346, (2) proof of violation of the Massachusetts gratuity statute, Mass. Gen.L. ch. 268A, § 3, was an essential element of his conviction, (3) at the time of his conviction, both the Federal District and First Circuit Court of Appeals held that no link need be proven…”
Sawyer v. United States, 239 F.3d 31 (1st Cir. 2001). “More specifically, we concluded in Sawyer that the jury instructions allowed the jury to find Sawyer guilty of honest services mail fraud upon proof that he violated either the Massachusetts gratuity statute, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 268A, § 3, or the Massachusetts gift statute, Mass.”
United States v. Tavares, 844 F.3d 46 (1st Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “We bypass the question of whether the indictment sufficiently alleged violations of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 268A § 3 and turn to whether the Government presented sufficient evidence that O’Brien violated the statute.”
Harhen v. Brown, 730 N.E.2d 859 (Mass. 2000). “In March of 1994, Hancock entered into settlement agreements regarding these lobbying activities with the United States Attorney’s office and the State Ethics Commission, pursuant to which Hancock acknowledged it had violated the Commonwealth’s illegal gratuity statute, G. L. c.…”
Harhen v. Brown, 710 N.E.2d 224 (Mass. App. Ct. 1999). · cites it 3× “§ 1341 (1994); G. L. c. 268A, § 3. The settlement agreement 5 between Hancock and the United States Attorney’s office recited the following: “Hancock publicly acknowledged that certain lobbying activities by members of the Government Relations Department violated Massachusetts…”
Moskow v. Boston Redevelopment Auth., 210 N.E.2d 699 (Mass. 1965). · cites it 2× “" In their brief the plaintiffs make broad references to this being within the prohibition of G.L.c. 268A, §§ 3 and 17 (as appearing in St.”
Show all 30 citing cases →
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 268A, § 3(6) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Dutney, 348 N.E.2d 812 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976).
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 268A, § 3(a) — 5 cases
United States v. Sawyer, 85 F.3d 713 (1st Cir. 1996). “268B, § 6 (the “gift” statute), which prohibits — under threat of civil penal *726 ties—a “legislative agent” from offering or giving to a public official (or an official’s acceptance of) “gifts” aggregating $100 or more per year; and (2) Mass. Gen. L. ch. 268A, § 3 (the…”
Harhen v. Brown, 710 N.E.2d 224 (Mass. App. Ct. 1999). “§ 1341 (1994); G. L. c. 268A, § 3. The settlement agreement 5 between Hancock and the United States Attorney’s office recited the following: “Hancock publicly acknowledged that certain lobbying activities by members of the Government Relations Department violated Massachusetts…”
United States v. Tavares, 844 F.3d 46 (1st Cir. 2016). “We bypass the question of whether the indictment sufficiently alleged violations of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 268A § 3 and turn to whether the Government presented sufficient evidence that O’Brien violated the statute.”
In re Nexium (Esomeprazole) Antitrust Litig., 309 F.R.D. 107 (D. Mass. 2015).
United States v. O'Brien, 994 F. Supp. 2d 167 (D. Mass. 2014).
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 268A, § 3(b) — 3 cases
United States v. Ferber, 966 F. Supp. 90 (D. Mass. 1997). “11 The jury convicted Ferber of all the charged Travel Act Counts predicated on violations of the Massachusetts gratuity statute, Mass.Gen.L. ch. 268A, § 3. Prior to sentencing, however, this Court, sua sponte, dismissed those counts for the reasons discussed herein.”
Commonwealth v. Qualter, 473 N.E.2d 729 (Mass. App. Ct. 1985).
Commonwealth v. Degnan (Mass. App. Ct. 2017).
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 268A, § 3(c) — 1 case
United States v. Medina, 41 F. Supp. 2d 38 (D. Mass. 1999).
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.