Robinson v. Charles A. Flynn Ins. Agency, Inc., 93-P-1550
| Decision Date | 09 August 1995 |
| Docket Number | No. 93-P-1550,93-P-1550 |
| Citation | 39 Mass.App.Ct. 902,653 N.E.2d 207 |
| Parties | Richard ROBINSON & another v. CHARLES A. FLYNN INSURANCE AGENCY, INC. |
| Court | Appeals Court of Massachusetts |
Frederic N. Halstrom, Boston, for the plaintiffs.
Richard F. Wholley, Winchester, for the defendant.
RESCRIPT.
The plaintiff Richard Robinson was injured in an automobile accident through the fault of one Cynthia Croft, whose bodily injury liability policy limits ($20,000), added to his own underinsured motorist coverage limit ($10,000), was insufficient to cover his medical bills. In this action the plaintiffs (Richard and his wife) are suing the insurance agency through which for years they had obtained their automobile insurance, alleging that the agency had a duty to advise them that they could, if they wished, purchase underinsured motorist coverage up to the amount of their bodily injury liability coverage ($100,000/$300,000), for an additional premium of $142 per year. The wife, who actually purchased the policy, testified that, had she been so advised, she would have purchased the additional coverage. The judge allowed the agency's motion for a directed verdict, and the plaintiffs appealed.
The judge's ruling was correct. There were in this case no "special circumstances of assertion, representation and reliance" that underlay the recovery in Bicknell, Inc. v. Havlin, 9 Mass.App.Ct. 497, 500-501 (1980). See Rapp v. Lester L. Burdick, Inc., 336 Mass. 438, 442, 146 N.E.2d 368 (1957); McCue v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America, 371 Mass. 659, 661, 358 N.E.2d 799 (1976). Rather, the plaintiffs rely on a general duty owed, they claim, by insurance agents to their clients "to inform and advise them as to the availability of uninsured and underinsured motor vehicle coverage up to the limits of the bodily injury liability coverage the client[s] carr[y]." Such a sweeping duty finds no support, as the plaintiffs' concede, in Massachusetts appellate decisions. Support in other jurisdictions is spotty at best. See, e.g., Dimeo v. Burns, Brooks & McNeil, Inc., 6 Conn.App. 241, 245, 504 A.2d 557 (1986); Tucker v. Country Mut. Ins. Co., 125 Ill.App.3d 329, 80 Ill.Dec. 610, 465 N.E.2d 956 (1984); Sobotor v. Prudential Property & Cas. Ins. Co., 200 N.J.Super. 333, 491 A.2d 737 (1984), all of which are distinguishable. Some decisions have explicitly rejected such a duty. Jones v. Grewe, 189 Cal.App.3d 950, 954, 234 Cal.Rptr. 717 (1987). Sandbulte v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 343...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thrivent Fin. for Lutherans v. Strojny
...Corp. v. Riley & Rielly Ins. Agency, Inc., 44 Mass.App.Ct. 29, 687 N.E.2d 1267, 1269 (1997) (citing Robinson v. Charles A. Flynn Ins. Agency, Inc., 39 Mass.App.Ct. 902, 653 N.E.2d 207 (1995)). 45.Szymanski, 778 N.E.2d at 27–28 (Mass.App.Ct.2002) (quoting Baldwin Crane, 687 N.E.2d at 1269). ......
-
The Saint Consulting Group, Inc. v. Eastern Insurance Group, LLC
... ... See HDH Corp. v. Atlantic Charter ... Ins. Co. , 425 Mass. 433, 436, 681 N.E.2d 847 ... insured. See Robinson v. Charles A. Flynn Ins. Agency, ... Inc ... ...
-
Somnus Mattress Corp. v. Hilson
...594 A.2d 1092, 1094 (Me. 1991) ; Sadler v. Loomis, 139 Md. App. 374, 776 A.2d 25, 46 (2001) ; Robinson v. Charles A. Flynn Ins. Agency, 39 Mass. App. Ct. 902, 653 N.E.2d 207, 207–08 (1995) ; Harts v. Farmers Ins. Exchange, 461 Mich. 1, 597 N.W.2d 47, 48 (1999) ; Murphy v. Kuhn, 90 N.Y.2d 26......
-
Wilson v. James L. Cooney Ins. Agency, 05-P-382.
...naming them as loss payees of the insurance agreement procured by [the tenant]"). See also Robinson v. Charles A. Flynn Ins. Agency, Inc., 39 Mass.App.Ct. 902, 902, 653 N.E.2d 207 (1995) (there is no "general duty" owed insurance agents in Massachusetts to inform and advise clients as to ap......
-
Introduction to the claims game
...and confidence. See Klimstra v. State Farm Auto Ins. Co., 891 F. Supp. 1329 (D. Minn. 1995); Robinson v. Flynn Ins. Agency Inc. , 39 Mass. App. Ct. 902, 903 (1995); Gates v. Logan, 862 P. 2d 134 (Wash. App. 1993). However, when an agent or broker holds himself or herself out as possessing s......