Haddad v. Gonzalez, 576 N.E.2d 658 (1991)

Citation: Haddad v. Gonzalez, 576 N.E.2d 658 (1991)
Parent Document: Haddad v. Gonzalez, 576 N.E.2d 658 (1991)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 1991-08-12
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2013415/haddad-v-gonzalez/ ↗

Full Text

894 chars

Haddad contends that the only effect of the 1979 amendment was the expansion of the class of persons who could recover c. 93A damages. Haddad is correct that the amendment did enlarge the class of persons who could sue under § 9 to include claimants other; than those in privity with the defendant. See Van Dyke v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 388 Mass. 671, 675 (1983). This was not, however, the only effect of the amendment. In fact, as we indicated in the Maillet decision, in light of the amendment, the invasion of any legally protected interest of another (including injury to, the person) may be compensable under § 9. See 407 Mass, at 192, citing Leardi v. Brown, 394 Mass. 151, 157-158 (1985). The 1979 amendment thus broadened the class of persons who could prosecute claims under G. L. c. 93A, and at the same time enlarged the set of damage types compensable under the statute.

Other Sections in This Document (154)

Full Text