Szymanski v. Boston Mutual Life Insurance
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
At issue is the defendant insurer’s promotional materials and representations made by its insurance agent indicating that a so-called “vanishing-premiums” life insurance policy sold to the plaintiff would accumulate sufficient value in nine years to cover the cost of the annual premiums thereafter.1 A judge of the Superior Court allowed the defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the basis of statutes of limitations. We reverse.
Background. In 1986, the plaintiff, James Szymanski,2 then a foreman with an associate’s degree in manufacturing, owned a fully paid $5,000 life insurance policy…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Demoulas v. Demoulas Super Markets, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
- Gaidon v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1999
- Bowen v. Eli Lilly & Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1990
- Frith v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1998
- Gaidon v. Guardian Life Insurance of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Scott M. Epstein v. C.R. Bard, Inc., Futuremed Interventional, Inc. Crossbow Ventures, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2006
- Weathers v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceMississippi Supreme Court · 2009
- Stolzoff v. Waste Systems International, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2003
- Harrington v. CostelloMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
- Loguidice v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2003
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.