Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 269, § 14A (2026)

Annoying telephone calls or electronic communication

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 14A. Whoever telephones another person or contacts another person by electronic communication, or causes a person to be telephoned or contacted by electronic communication, repeatedly, for the sole purpose of harassing, annoying or molesting the person or the person's family, whether or not conversation ensues, or whoever telephones or contacts a person repeatedly by electronic communication and uses indecent or obscene language to the person, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $500 or by imprisonment for not more than 3 months, or by both such a fine and imprisonment.

For purposes of this section, ''electronic communication'' shall include, but not be limited to, any transfer of signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data or intelligence of any nature transmitted in whole or in part by a wire, radio, electromagnetic, photo-electronic or photo-optical system.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 25 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1973–2026 · leading case: Dist. Attorney for the Plymouth Dist. v. Coffey, 434 N.E.2d 1276 (Mass. 1982).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Dist. Attorney for the Plymouth Dist. v. Coffey, 434 N.E.2d 1276 (Mass. 1982). · cites it 10× “A judge of a District Court, after a hearing, allowed the defendant's motion to suppress "[a]ny portions of the contents of any interception or any evidence derived therefrom as a result of the use of a pen register or similar device pertaining to the telephone number of the…”

Commonwealth v. Kelly, 25 N.E.3d 288 (Mass. 2015). · cites it 2× “In our view, the Legislature recognized the possibility of additional factors playing a role in the perpetration of an assault or a battery that occurs "because of" the victim's race.”

Commonwealth v. Wotan, 665 N.E.2d 976 (Mass. 1996). · cites it 3× “The defendant was charged with making annoying telephone calls under G. L. c. 269, § 14A (1994 ed.), which makes it a misdemeanor to telephone someone repeatedly solely to harass, annoy, or molest.”

Commonwealth v. Richards, 690 N.E.2d 419 (Mass. 1998). · cites it 5× “For this conduct, he was charged with making annoying telephone calls in violation of G. L. c. 269, § 14A. 1 The defendant filed a mo *690 tion to dismiss.”

Commonwealth v. Chou, 741 N.E.2d 17 (Mass. 2001). “G. L. c. 269, § 14A (“Whoever telephones another person .”

Commonwealth v. Wilcox, 841 N.E.2d 1240 (Mass. 2006). “When he reached young girls, he lured them into indecent conversation and asked them, among other things, to make pictures and videotape for him, presumably of themselves.”

O'Brien v. New England Tel. & Tel. Co., 664 N.E.2d 843 (Mass. 1996). “The evidence might not warrant a finding that O’Brien violated G. L. c. 269, § 14A (1994 ed.). A conviction of making repeated harassing or annoying telephone calls requires proof that the “sole purpose” of the calls was to harass or annoy.”

Commonwealth v. Wotan, 643 N.E.2d 62 (Mass. App. Ct. 1994). · cites it 5× “After trial in the District Court, Wotan was convicted of violating G. L. c. 269, § 14A, which makes it a misdemeanor to telephone someone repeatedly solely to harass, annoy or molest.”

Perry v. Commonwealth, 780 N.E.2d 53 (Mass. 2002). “There, we held that the statute penalizing annoying telephone calls, G. L. c. 269, § 14A, did not apply to the sending of annoying facsimile transmissions over telephone lines.”

Commonwealth v. Voight, 556 N.E.2d 115 (Mass. App. Ct. 1990). · cites it 2× “Edgartown wrongly charged the defendant Kevin Voight with violating G. L. c. 269, § 14A, which punishes making telephone calls solely to harass, annoy, or molest, and a judge of the District Court erroneously denied a motion for a required finding of not guilty.”

Commonwealth v. Silva, 726 N.E.2d 408 (Mass. 2000). “906, 907 (1996); or a charge of harassment, see G. L. c. 269, § 14A. As required, the protective order stated that, “[f]or good cause, either the Plaintiff or the Defendant may request [the] Court to modify this Order before its scheduled expiration date.”

Commonwealth v. Martinez, 683 N.E.2d 699 (Mass. App. Ct. 1997). · cites it 2× “265, § 43, one count of making harassing telephone calls, G. L. c. 269, § 14A, and one count of trespassing, G.”

Show all 25 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.