In re K.W.-1, K.W.-2, and K.R.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• demand letter alleging unfair settlement practices sufficient even though violation of G. L. c. 176D, § 3 [9] [f], not specifically alleged
• where interest is component of underlying judgment, “actual damages” to be multiplied include both base recovery and interest
• “trial judge’s erroneous exclusion of evidence does not necessitate reversal . . . unless it ‘injuriously affect[s] the substantial rights’ of a party”
• trial court properly doubled amount of unpaid insurance proceeds and the lost interest on the proceeds
• “a causal connection between the defendant’s wrongdoing and the resulting damages is still a part of c. 93A calculus”
• “Additional optional bodily injury coverage merely increases the potential amount an injured party can recover while offering the same protection as compulsory coverage”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).