Legal Opinion

Chiropractic Health Care Centers v. Amica Mutual Insurance

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided August 20, 2003PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LoConto, PJ.

The plaintiffs, health care providers,1 brought suit seeking recovery for services rendered to the defendants insured pursuant to G.L.c. 90, §34M. In a jury waived small claims trial, the trial judge determined that the noncooperation defense created by the statute does not limit a healthcare provider’s right to *131claim a contract between itself and an insurance carrier prior to the carrier’s notification of its intent to deny coverage. Aggrieved by the trial judge’s Findings and Rulings, the defendant, Arnica Mutual Insurance (“Arnica”), commenced this District/Municipal Courts…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. ClermyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1995
  2. Lorenzo-Martinez v. Safety InsuranceMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2003
  3. Gleason v. Hardware Mutual Casualty Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954
  4. Searls v. Standard Accident InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
  5. Brito v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1997

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Cotton v. Hanover InsuranceMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2010
  2. Kaplan v. Pilgrim InsuranceMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API