Legal Opinion

Seney v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance

Massachusetts Superior Court

Decided December 15, 1997No. 9402864APublished

1Opinion of the CourtBurnes, J.

Plaintiff Cheryl A. Seney (Seney) seeks damages from defendant Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance Company (Prudential) for payment of a judgment Seney obtained against Prudential’s insured Mark L. Clark (Clark). Seney sues as a third-party beneficiary and assignee of the Prudential and Clark contract, and for violations of G.L.c. 176D and c. 93A.

Prudential now moves for summary judgment contending that Seney’s claims are time barred and that, if New Hampshire law applies, Seney has no claim under Chapters 93A and 176D. For the following reasons, the Defendant’s Motion is DENIED as to…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Kourouvacilis v. General Motors Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
  3. Pederson v. Time, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
  4. Community National Bank v. DawesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
  5. Cassesso v. Commissioner of CorrectionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API