McCue v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that jury verdict for insured was proper because there were special circumstances that created a heightened duty
• observing that a jury could have properly found special circumstances based upon the nature and duration of the relationship, where a long-term continuing relationship existed, the insurer’s agents made monthly visits, and plaintiffs held several different policies with the insurer
• continuing relationship existed for twenty-eight years during which agents made monthly visits to plaintiffs to attend to their insur- ance needs
• there plaintiffs had a twenty-eight-year relationship with defendant, whose agent had assured them that he would procure the insurance coverage, but failed to do so
• “A jury could have found that there was a climate in which reliance by the plaintiffs on [the agent’s] assertions and representations [about the policy] was particularly justified.”
• jury could find such special circumstances where the plaintiff and defendant had twenty-eight-year professional relationship and defendant agent visited the plaintiff every few months to offer updates and advice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).