Legal Opinion
Paradoa v. CNA Insurance
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided November 19, 1996No. 95-P-390PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKass, J.
On an appeal from a directed verdict for the defendant CNA Insurance Company (CNA), we are asked to decide whether CNA exercised a degree of control over three independent contractors (an examining physician and two private investigators) sufficient to render CNA liable for their tortious conduct. We conclude that there was not such control and that CNA’s motion for a directed verdict was rightly allowed1; accordingly, we affirm the judgment.
*652These are the pertinent facts, taking the evidence in a light most favorable to the plaintiff Paradoa. H.P. Hood & Sons, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 370…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Kelley v. RossiMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
- Corsetti v. Stone Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
- H. P. Hood & Sons, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
- St. Germaine v. PendergastMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
- Chase v. INDEPENDENT PRACTICE ASSOCIATION, INCMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1991
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Chiao-Yun Ku v. Town of FraminghamMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2004
- Liftee v. BoyerHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 2005
- Doe v. MedeirosDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2017
- Zucco v. KaneMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2002
- Cabreira v. Verizon New England, Inc.Massachusetts Superior Court · 2007
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.