Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Davis v. Allstate Insurance

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 18, 2001Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSosman, J.

The court imposes on Allstate Insurance Company (Allstate) an obligation to pay postjudgment interest that is contrary to the express provisions of Allstate’s standard automobile insurance policy. In my view, the judge below correctly granted Allstate’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of its liability for postjudgment interest. The court’s opinion also allows the plaintiff to pursue a G. L. c. 93A claim against Allstate based on its refusal to pay that disputed postjudgment interest. While I agree that the plaintiff should be allowed to proceed on a claim that Allstate’s delay in…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Citation Insurance v. GomezMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
  2. Sproles v. GreeneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
  3. O'Malley v. O'MalleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1995
  4. Weimer v. Country Mutual Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Southern General Insurance v. RossCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1997

20 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