Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 276, § 55 (2026)

Discharge upon acknowledgment of satisfaction for injury

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

Section 55. If a person committed to jail is under indictment or complaint for, or is under recognizance to answer to, a charge of assault and battery or other misdemeanor for which he is liable in a civil action, unless the offence was committed by or upon a sheriff or other officer of justice, or riotously, or with intent to commit a felony, or is a violation of an order issued pursuant to section 18 or 34B of chapter 208, section 32 of chapter 209, section 3, 4 or 5 of chapter 209A or section 15 or 20 of chapter 209C, a violation of sections 13M or 15D of chapter 265 or would otherwise constitute abuse, as defined in section 1 of said chapter 209A, and the person injured appears before the court or justice who made the commitment or took the recognizance, or before which the indictment or complaint is pending, and acknowledges in writing that he has received satisfaction for the injury, the court or justice may in its or his discretion, upon payment of such expenses as it or he shall order, discharge the recognizance or supersede the commitment, or discharge the defendant from the indictment or complaint, and may also discharge all recognizances and supersede the commitment of all witnesses in the case.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1976–2015 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Henderson, 747 N.E.2d 659 (Mass. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Commonwealth v. Henderson, 747 N.E.2d 659 (Mass. 2001). · cites it 4× “268, § 13B, the defendant asserted an “accord and satisfaction” defense pursuant to G. L. c. 276, § 55. 5 Pursuant to the statute, “[a] judge may discharge the defendant from an indictment or complaint on ‘a charge of assault and battery or other misdemeanor for which he is…”
Commonwealth v. Guzman, 845 N.E.2d 270 (Mass. 2006). · cites it 5× “G. L. c. 276, § 55. The Commonwealth appealed, arguing, in essence, that the statute violates the separation of powers pursuant to art.”
Commonwealth v. Rotonda, 747 N.E.2d 1199 (Mass. 2001). · cites it 2× “The Commonwealth argues that this payment was not an accord and *222 satisfaction, as authorized by G. L. c. 276, § 55, see Commonwealth v. Henderson, ante 155 (2001), and that if it were, then the statute is unconstitutional.”
Commonwealth v. Rondeau, 534 N.E.2d 797 (Mass. App. Ct. 1989). · cites it 2× “268, § 13B, is unconstitutionally vague and ambiguous because its provisions are in conflict with the provisions of G. L. c. 276, § 55. 9 He argues that under G.”
Commonwealth v. Gordon, 87 Mass. App. Ct. 322 (Mass. App. Ct. 2015). “The Act prohibits accord and satisfaction, under G. L. c. 276, § 55, in all cases alleging a criminal act constituting domestic abuse.”
Commonwealth v. Gonzalez, 448 N.E.2d 759 (Mass. 1983). “” G. L. c. 276, § 55. At most, the accord and satisfaction in this case might have prompted a discharge of the complaint for assault and battery.”
Commonwealth v. Conant, 423 N.E.2d 1035 (Mass. App. Ct. 1981). “2 We are unpersuaded by the defendant’s other argument, unsupported by authority or the facts of the record, that the Commonwealth deprived him of an opportunity to reach accord and satisfaction with the victim under G. L. c. 276, § 55. 3 We note that a finding of no probable…”
State v. Nelles, 713 P.2d 806 (Alaska Ct. App. 1986). “§ 19-3401-3403 (1979); Mass.Gen.Laws Ann. ch. 276, § 55 (West 1972); Nev.”
Mahoney's Case, 356 N.E.2d 700 (Mass. 1976). · cites it 2× “In a criminal action for assault and battery against the two employees, an accord and satisfaction was reached under G. L. c. 276, §§55 and 56, while that action was pending in the Superior Court.”
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.