Legal Opinion

Costa v. Liberty Mutual Insurance

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided August 27, 1990No. 89-P-349PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKass, J.

Upon a motion for summary judgment by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (Liberty), a Superior Court judge decided that Liberty, in its position as a workers’ compensation insurer, owed no duty to the plaintiff Michael Costa, an injured employee, to advise him that he had a potential action against the manufacturer of the machine involved in his industrial accident. Judgment was entered for the defendant and the plaintiff has appealed. We affirm.

The dispositive facts, as must be the case when summary judgment is granted, are undisputed. Costa was hurt while *177working on a “mangle” machine.1…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Dinsky v. Town of FraminghamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
  2. Flattery v. GregoryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
  3. Calligaris's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
  4. Swift v. American Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1987

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. DaRoza v. ArterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1993
  2. Pinto v. Aberthaw Construction Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1994
  3. Percoco v. Wausau InsuranceMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1991
  4. Pinto v. Aberthaw Construction Co.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1993
  5. Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API