Legal Opinion

Vieira v. Schupp

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 8, 1981PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNolan, J.

This case comes to us on certification from the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island of two questions concerning certain provisions of our so called “no-fault” insurance law. In particular, we are concerned with G. L. c. 90, § 34M, and G. L. c. 231, § 6D, inserted by St. 1970, c. 670, §§ 4, 5. SeeS.J.C. Rule 1:03, § 1, as appearing in 382 Mass. 700 (1981).

The questions are as follows:

“1. Under the Massachusetts No-Fault Insurance Law, Mass. Acts 1970, c. 671 [sic], as amended, is plaintiff’s tort action barred, because the personal injury protection benefits she has…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Pinnick v. ClearyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1971
  2. Hein-Werner Corp. v. Jackson Industries, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
  3. Victum v. MartinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  4. Chipman v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Columbia Chiropractic Group, Inc. v. Trust InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1999
  2. Phelps v. MacIntyreMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
  3. Amiga Mutual Insurance v. BagleyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1989
  4. Colonial Tavern, Inc. v. Boston Licensing BoardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981
  5. Browning v. BrokvistMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1998

6 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