LaFleur v. C. C. Pierce Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
398 Mass. 254, 496 N.E.2d 827 (1986)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
LaFleur’s (plaintiff) right foot was injured at work. The company doctor told LaFleur that he had a sprained toe. LaFleur entered into a written settlement agreement and release with the company’s insurer (defendant), which stated that LaFleur could not seek additional benefits “because of this injury.” LaFleur was diagnosed with a rare arterial disease that resulted in the amputation of both of his legs. A doctor testified that LaFleur’s accident at work had injured his arterial system, which aggravated his preexisting arterial disease, and that the accident was causally related to the amputation of LaFleur’s legs. LaFleur sued for rescission of the release. The trial court entered judgment for the defendants, finding that LaFleur had simply made an incorrect prediction about future events when he signed the release.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hennessey, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
