Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bezanson ex rel. Medomak Canning Co. v. Metropolitan Insurance & Annuity Co.

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided December 13, 1991No. Nos. 91-1306, 91-1357Published

1DissentSelya, Circuit Judge

This is a hard case — hard in the sense that the law, when faithfully applied to the facts as supportably found below, requires us to grant relief to a groak-like plaintiff who scarcely seems deserving of it. But, because the court’s result-oriented response to this pleasureless predicament makes a bad situation worse, I dissent.

I see no need for a lengthy exegesis. This is a diversity case — and if I am correct in my belief that state law has been wrenched into unfamiliar contours, then the Maine Supreme Judicial Court will likely have (or find) an opportunity to set matters straight before…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. In Re BennyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1983
  2. Northeast Insurance v. Concord General Mutual InsuranceSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1983
  3. Ray v. Blue Alliance Mutual InsuranceSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1991
  4. Fortin v. WilenskySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1947
  5. Norwood v. Crabtree (In Re Crabtree)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1984

2 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