Legal Opinion
Roe v. Federal Insurance
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided February 26, 1992PublishedCited by 58 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGreaney, J.
This case raises the question whether a dentist’s professional liability insurance covers claims by a patient and her spouse based on the dentist’s improper sexual relationship with his patient. We conclude that it does not.
The patient, Mary Roe, and her husband (plaintiffs), brought an action in the Superior Court against the dentist, asserting claims of malpractice, breach of contract, sexual assault, assault and battery, violation of G. L. c. 93A, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and loss of consortium. The gravamen of the plaintiffs’ complaint was that the dentist had…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Marx v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity CompanyNebraska Supreme Court · 1968
- Harad, Charles A. And the Home Insurance Company v. The Aetna Casualty and Surety Company, and Catania, Francis JCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1988
- Curtis Ambulance of Florida, Inc. v. Board of County Commissioners of the County of Shawnee, Kansas, and Medevac Midamerica, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1987
- Hirst v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceIdaho Court of Appeals · 1984
- Bank of California, N. A. v. W. H. Opie, California Union Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by58 opinions
- Princeton Insurance v. ChunmuangSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1997
- Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2001
- New Mexico Physicians Mutual Liability Co. v. LaMureNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1993
- Lindheimer v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1994
- GRE Insurance Group v. Metropolitan Boston Housing Partnership, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.