 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Safety Insurance Co. v. Day10/28/2005
elying on the regular use exclusion. That she prevails on only one of the two grounds does not mean that she must bear costs imposed on her by the insurer's choice to dispute its liability.
The amount of reimbursement of attorney's fees and expenses is "largely discretionary." Linthicum v. Archambault, 379 Mass. 381, 388 (1979). The judge reviewed Safety's opposition to the fee application thoughtfully; articulated his reasons for accepting or rejecting the objections; and made adjustments. The insurer has not come close to demonstrating an abuse of discretion. Compare Siegel v. Berkshire Life Ins. Co., 64 Mass. App. Ct. 698, 705 (2005). Its further contention that the award includes an improper addition of prejudgment interest on the fee component is misplaced. The award includes interest only from the date of the judge's decision to the date of entry of judgment, and is consistent with G. L. c. 235, ยง 8.
Judgments affirmed.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Massachusetts Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|