New England Legal Foundation
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission & History
    • Annual Reports
    • Board of Directors
    • State Advisory Councils >
      • Connecticut
      • Maine
      • Massachusetts
      • New Hampshire
      • Rhode Island
      • Vermont
    • Trustees
    • Members
    • Staff
    • Job & Internship Opportunities
  • News & Events
  • Docket
  • Briefs
  • Donate
  • Contact

Norfolk & Dedham Mutual Fire Ins. v. Morrison et al. 

6/2/2010

 
Protecting Freedom of Contract in the Allocation of Liability Risks in Real Estate Leases

This case raised an issue of first impression in the appellate courts of the Commonwealth.  The case concerned Massachusetts General Laws c. 186, § 15, which voids any provision in a real estate lease purporting to obligate a tenant to indemnify its landlord for losses incurred as a result of the landlord’s own negligence.  The issue presented was whether this statute would also void a lease provision requiring a tenant merely to pay for including the landlord as an additional insured on the tenant’s liability policy if, as a result, the landlord was insured for its own negligence.  

The case arose when a doctor renting commercial space in an office park paid a small additional sum to add her landlord to her policy.  When a patient of the doctor was injured in a slip and fall accident in the parking lot and sued both the doctor and the landlord, the doctor’s carrier filed a declaratory judgment action seeking a determination that it owed the landlord no duty of coverage for any negligence of the landlord in causing the injuries.  On summary judgment, the Superior Court agreed with the carrier that by requiring the doctor to pay the premium for adding the landlord to her policy, the lease shifted the cost of the landlord’s negligence to the tenant in violation of § 15.  The SJC took the case on direct appellate review and solicited amicus briefs.  

With co-amici NAIOP Massachusetts and the Real Estate Bar Association for Massachusetts, NELF argued that the trial court’s judgment should be vacated.  Making a lengthy review of legal authorities in other jurisdictions, NELF argued that the court should make the distinction between an obligation to purchase insurance and an obligation to indemnify.  In particular, NELF set out at length the clear legal and conceptual distinction between an indemnification arising in landlord-tenant relations and the scope of insurance coverage available to additional insureds under a policy.  Citing the public policy favoring the use of insurance to guarantee that the means exist to compensate injured third parties, NELF noted that insurance payments in such cases as this compensate the allegedly injured patient and do not indemnify the landlord for the latter’s costs and expenses.  Finally, NELF also argued that the Superior Court’s expansive reading of § 15 interferes with the right of commercial parties to allocate risk and the costs of insuring risk freely between themselves.  

In a decision that clearly showed the influence NELF’s brief, the SJC vacated the trial court’s judgment.  Relying on the same out-of-state cases as NELF had discussed, the SJC expressed its agreement with its sister high courts concerning the distinction between a promise to indemnify and a promise to procure insurance.  As NELF had also urged, the court recognized that the landlord’s specific legal status as an additional insured was a crucial factor in the outcome.


Comments are closed.

    The Docket

    To obtain a copy of any of NELF's briefs, contact us at info@nelfonline.org.

    Categories

    All
    1st Circuit Court Of Appeals
    2nd Circuit Court Of Appeals
    3rd Circuit Court Of Appeals
    Business Litigation Session
    CT
    CT Superior Court
    CT Supreme Court
    Employer Employee Relationships
    February 2018
    February 2019
    Government Regulation/Administration Of Justice
    MA
    MA Appeals Court
    MA Division Of Administrative Law Appeals
    March 2015
    MA Superior Court
    MA Supreme Judicial Court
    MA US District Court
    ME
    ME Supreme Judicial Court
    NH
    NH Supreme Court
    Property Rights
    RI
    RI Supreme Court
    SCOTUS
    United States Supreme Court
    US Court Of Appeals Federal Circuit
    US District Court ME
    VT
    VT Supreme Court

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    August 2020
    June 2020
    January 2020
    June 2019
    April 2019
    October 2018
    June 2018
    February 2018
    October 2017
    October 2016
    June 2016
    February 2016
    October 2015
    June 2015
    March 2015
    October 2014
    June 2014
    February 2014
    October 2013
    June 2013
    February 2013
    October 2012
    June 2012
    February 2012
    October 2011
    June 2011
    February 2011
    October 2010
    June 2010
    February 2010
    October 2009
    February 2009
    October 2008
    June 2008
    February 2008
    October 2007
    June 2007
    October 2006
    June 2006
    February 2006
    October 2005
    June 2005
    February 2005
    October 2004
    June 2004
    February 2004
    October 2003
    May 2003
    February 2003
    September 2002
    May 2002
    February 2002
    May 2001