Legal Opinion

O'Sullivan v. Hingham Mutual Fire Insurance

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided July 30, 2009PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGardner, J.

The plaintiff, Sandra R. O’Sullivan (“O’Sullivan”), brought this action to recover damages for the alleged breach of contract and G.L.c. 93A violation by the defendant, Hingham Mutual Fire Insurance Company (“Hingham”), in denying her claim for benefits under the “collapse” provision of her businessowners insurance policy, and in failing to a make a reasonable investigation or offer of settlement under G.Lc. 176D before denying liability. The jury returned a verdict in favor of O’Sullivan on the breach of contract claim. The trial judge, who had reserved the G.L.c. 93A issue, also found for…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Raunela v. Hertz Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1972
  2. Clegg v. ButlerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
  3. Kelly v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  4. Demeo v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1995
  5. Parker v. D'AvolioMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1996

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Brown v. Norfolk & Dedham Mutual Fire InsuranceMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2011
  2. Genest v. Commerce InsuranceMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2010
  3. Jucino v. Commerce InsuranceMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API