Mass. Gen. Laws » Part I Title XV Chapter 93A
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, § 11 (2026)

Persons engaged in business; actions for unfair trade practices; class actions; damages; injunction; costs

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

Section 11. Any person who engages in the conduct of any trade or commerce and who suffers any loss of money or property, real or personal, as a result of the use or employment by another person who engages in any trade or commerce of an unfair method of competition or an unfair or deceptive act or practice declared unlawful by section two or by any rule or regulation issued under paragraph (c) of section two may, as hereinafter provided, bring an action in the superior court, or in the housing court as provided in section three of chapter one hundred and eighty-five C, whether by way of original complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party action for damages and such equitable relief, including an injunction, as the court deems to be necessary and proper.

Such person, if he has not suffered any loss of money or property, may obtain such an injunction if it can be shown that the aforementioned unfair method of competition, act or practice may have the effect of causing such loss of money or property.

Any persons entitled to bring such action may, if the use or employment of the unfair method of competition or the unfair or deceptive act or practice has caused similar injury to numerous other persons similarly situated and if the court finds in a preliminary hearing that he adequately and fairly represents such other persons, bring the action on behalf of himself and such other similarly injured and situated persons; the court shall require that notice of such action be given to unnamed petitioners in the most effective, practicable manner. Such action shall not be dismissed, settled or compromised without the approval of the court, and notice of any proposed dismissal, settlement or compromise shall be given to all members of the class of petitioners in such a manner as the court directs.

A person may assert a claim under this section in a district court, whether by way of original complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party action, for money damages only. Said damages may include double or treble damages, attorneys' fees and costs, as hereinafter provided, with provision for tendering by the person against whom the claim is asserted of a written offer of settlement for single damages, also as hereinafter provided. No rights to equitable relief shall be created under this paragraph, nor shall a person asserting such claim be able to assert any claim on behalf of other similarly injured and situated persons as provided in the preceding paragraph. The provisions of sections ninety-five to one hundred and ten, inclusive, of chapter two hundred and thirty-one, where applicable, shall apply to a claim under this section, except that the provisions for remand, removal and transfer shall be controlled by the amount of single damages claimed hereunder.

If the court finds for the petitioner, recovery shall be in the amount of actual damages; or up to three, but not less than two, times such amount if the court finds that the use or employment of the method of competition or the act or practice was a willful or knowing violation of said section two. For the purposes of this chapter, the amount of actual damages to be multiplied by the court shall be the amount of the judgment on all claims arising out of the same and underlying transaction or occurrence regardless of the existence or nonexistence of insurance coverage available in payment of the claim. In addition, the court shall award such other equitable relief, including an injunction, as it deems to be necessary and proper. The respondent may tender with his answer in any such action a written offer of settlement for single damages. If such tender or settlement is rejected by the petitioner, and if the court finds that the relief tendered was reasonable in relation to the injury actually suffered by the petitioner, then the court shall not award more than single damages.

If the court finds in any action commenced hereunder, that there has been a violation of section two, the petitioner shall, in addition to other relief provided for by this section and irrespective of the amount in controversy, be awarded reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in said action.

In any action brought under this section, in addition to the provisions of paragraph (b) of section two, the court shall also be guided in its interpretation of unfair methods of competition by those provisions of chapter ninety-three known as the Massachusetts Antitrust Act.

No action shall be brought or maintained under this section unless the actions and transactions constituting the alleged unfair method of competition or the unfair or deceptive act or practice occurred primarily and substantially within the commonwealth. For the purposes of this paragraph, the burden of proof shall be upon the person claiming that such transactions and actions did not occur primarily and substantially within the commonwealth.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,123 cases (145 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case: Ciardi v. F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd., 436 Mass. 53 (Mass. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ciardi v. F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd., 436 Mass. 53 (Mass. 2002). · cites it 18× “93A except to extent G. L. c. 93A, § 11, directs courts to consider decisions under Antitrust Act when interpreting “unfair methods of competition” in actions brought pursuant to G.”
Kraft Power Corp. v. Merrill, 981 N.E.2d 671 (Mass. 2013). · cites it 19× “We have not previously had occasion to decide whether a claim pursuant to G. L. c. 93A, § 11, survives the death of a *156 party.”
R.W. Granger & Sons, Inc. v. J & S Insulation, Inc., 435 Mass. 66 (Mass. 2001). · cites it 12× “J&S counterclaimed to like effect, adding a claim that by wrongfully withholding payments from J&S, Granger had violated G. L. c. 93A, § 11. At the same time, J&S asserted a counterclaim under G.”
Drywall Sys., Inc. v. ZVI Constr. Co., 761 N.E.2d 482 (Mass. 2002). · cites it 13× “An arbitration panel awarded multiple damages and attorney’s fees under G. L. c. 93A, § 11, to Drywall Systems, Inc.”
Auto Flat Car Crushers, Inc. v. Hanover Ins. Co., 17 N.E.3d 1066 (Mass. 2014). · cites it 12× “The plaintiff then amended its complaint to assert a claim under G. L. c. 93A, § 11 (§ 11), arising out of the insurer’s failure to defend; the insurer did not avail itself of the statutory mechanism permitting a defendant to limit its liability to single damages by tendering…”
Weiler v. PortfolioScope, Inc., 469 Mass. 75 (Mass. 2014). · cites it 9× “e per cent amendment and the consulting agreements with Weiler as well as the covenant of good faith and fair dealing; 14 (2) Kimberlin tortiously interfered with Weiler’s contractual rights vis-a-vis PortfolioScope; (3) the defendants converted funds belonging to Weiler; (4)…”
Psy-Ed Corp. v. KLEIN HIRSCH, 947 N.E.2d 520 (Mass. 2011). · cites it 7× “11 On December 17, 1999, Psy-Ed and Valenzano filed a complaint against Klein and Schive in which they alleged defamation, violation of *703 G. L. c. 93A, § 11, civil conspiracy, and tortious interference with contractual and business relations (1999 action).”
Knapp Shoes, Inc. v. Sylvania Shoe Mfg. Corp., 640 N.E.2d 1101 (Mass. 1994). · cites it 12× “93A protected only consumers from unfair or deceptive trade practices, should be applied to every breach of warranty claim made by a person or entity engaged in trade or commerce in connection with an action brought under G.L.c. 93A, § 11. [5] We have not had occasion to…”
Nader v. Citron, 360 N.E.2d 870 (Mass. 1977). · cites it 5× “This case presents questions about the scope of G. L. c. 93A, § 11, which gives a private cause of *97 action to a person who is engaged in business and who suffers a loss as a result of an unfair or deceptive act or practice by another person also engaged in business.”
Frullo v. Landenberger, 814 N.E.2d 1105 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 9× “The plaintiffs, former clients of the defendant, an attorney, brought suit against him alleging negligence, breach of *815 contract, and violations of G. L. c. 93A, § 11, arising from his representation of them during the course of earlier litigation.”
Stop & Shop Supermarket Co. v. Loomer, 837 N.E.2d 712 (Mass. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 18× “We consider whether G. L. c. 93A, § 11, applies to *170 the following circumstance.”
Stand. Register Co. v. Bolton-Emerson, Inc., 649 N.E.2d 791 (Mass. App. Ct. 1995). · cites it 10× “Standard Register filed a two-count complaint claiming breach of contract against Bolton seeking a return of its deposit, cost of the replacement coater, moving expenses, and lost profits; and claiming a violation of G. L. c. 93A, § 11, against both the corporation and…”
Show all 1,123 citing cases →
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, § 11(6) — 1 case
Full Spectrum Software, Inc. v. Forte Automation Sys., Inc., 125 F. Supp. 3d 301 (D. Mass. 2015).
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, § 11(8) — 1 case
Fillmore v. Leasecomm Corp., 18 Mass. L. Rptr. 560 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2004).
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.