Masse v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., 90-472
Court | Supreme Court of New Hampshire |
Citation | 134 N.H. 523,593 A.2d 1164 |
Docket Number | No. 90-472,90-472 |
Parties | Robert MASSE and Betty Masse v. COMMERCIAL UNION INSURANCE COMPANY. |
Decision Date | 26 July 1991 |
Shaheen, Cappiello, Stein & Gordon P.A., Dover (Peter G. Callaghan on the brief, and William H. Shaheen orally), for plaintiffs.
Mulvey, Noucas & Cornell P.A., Portsmouth (Lesley F. Cornell on the brief and orally), for defendant.
The plaintiffs, Robert and Betty Masse, appeal from the Superior Court's (Dickson, J.) dismissal of their petition to set aside an arbitrator's (Stephen J. Dibble, Esq.) decision. In their petition, the plaintiffs assert that the arbitrator's denial of their claim against the defendant, Commercial Union Insurance Company (Commercial Union), for uninsured motorist coverage was the result of plain mistake and, hence, should have been set aside. Because the trial court dismissed the plaintiffs' petition without considering the record or the arbitrator's findings and rulings, we reverse and remand.
In the memorandum supporting their petition to set aside the arbitrator's decision, the plaintiffs allege the following. In August, 1987, plaintiff Robert Masse was seriously injured when the motorcycle on which he was a passenger left the road and struck two trees. According to the plaintiffs, the owner and driver of the motorcycle Robert Blatchford, lost control of it as they approached an intersection at the end of a street. As a result, they failed to stop at the intersection, crossing it, and travelled into a wooded area at a high rate of speed. The motorcycle struck one tree, throwing Masse off, and then continued an additional seventeen feet, where it struck a second tree. The plaintiffs also allege that Blatchford had purchased the motorcycle five months earlier and had never had any mechanical problems with the bike. Other than Masse and Blatchford, there were no eyewitnesses to the accident.
In their petition to set aside the arbitrator's decision, the plaintiffs asserted that the denial of their claim was "clearly wrong, the result of plain mistake, and against the weight of the evidence." The basis for this assertion was the arbitrator's alleged failure to apply the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to the plaintiffs' case, thus requiring them to prove their case through the use of direct evidence. Because there was no direct evidence of Blatchford's negligence, the plaintiffs argue that the arbitrator held them to a higher legal standard than required and that a review of the record would show that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
John A. Cookson Co. v. N.H. Ball Bearings, Inc., 2000–183.
...When undertaking a "plain mistake" analysis, we afford great deference to the arbitrator's decision. Masse v. Commercial Union Ins. Co. , 134 N.H. 523, 526, 593 A.2d 1164 (1991). We 147 N.H. 357 examine the face of the record to determine if there is validity to the claim of "plain mistake,......
-
John A. Cookson Co. v. Nhbb, 2000-183.
...When undertaking a "plain mistake" analysis, we afford great deference to the arbitrator's decision. Masse v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., 134 N.H. 523, 526, 593 A.2d 1164 (1991). We examine the face of the record to determine if there is validity to the claim of "plain mistake," and defer to......
-
Masse v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., 91-531
...mistake." After reviewing the record of the arbitration hearing, see Masse v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., 134 Page 1044 N.H. 523, 526, 593 A.2d 1164, 1165-66 (1991), the superior court agreed with the arbitrator's characterization of the evidence as largely inconclusive. The court, however, ......
-
Merrill Lynch Futures, Inc. v. Sands, 97–553.
...When undertaking a "plain mistake" analysis, we afford great deference to the arbitrators' decision. Masse v. Commercial Union Ins. Co. , 134 N.H. 523, 526, 593 A.2d 1164, 1166 (1991). We examine the face of the record to determine if there is validity to the claim of "plain mistake," and d......