Skip to Navigation
The Collaborative Clearinghouse for Lawsuits and Other Claims Against ACE Group Insurance Companies

ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY v. EARLS MARINA

ATTENTION: It is possible that this information may no longer be current and therefore may be inaccurate. The index contains both open and closed cases and is not a complete list of cases in which an ACE Insurance Group company is involved. This information is provided to give interested persons an idea of the issues disputed in the indexed cases. For a full understanding of a case, one should read the rest of the court file, including the response. For the most up-to-date and complete information on a case, visit www.pacer.gov or contact the clerk of the relevant court.

Case Number: 
1:13-cv-11565 Search Pacer
ACE Group party(s): 
Court Type: 
Federal
US District Court: 
Massachusetts District Court
Date Filed: 
Jul 1 2013

"COUNT I
BREACH OF CONTRACT

20. ACE repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 19 as if they were fully set forth herein.

21. Prior to the incident Earl's Marina and Ms. Paolini entered into an agreement in which Earl's Marina agreed, for a fee, to haul the vessel out of the water prior to the arrival of the Storm.

22. Earl's Marina breached its agreement with Ms. Paolini in that it failed to haul the vessel out of the water prior to the Storm.

23. It was foreseeable to Earl's Marina that its failure to remove the vessel from the water prior to the Storm might result in damage to the vessel.

24. The failure of Earl's Marina to haul the vessel out of the water prior to the Storm was the proximate cause of the damage suffered by the vessel at the time of the incident.

25. As a result of Earl's Marina's breaches, the vessel was damaged and the Paolinis incurred costs to repair the vessel.

WHEREFORE, the plaintiff, ACE, demands judgment against the defendant, Earl's Marina in the amount of $18,920.00, together with interest and costs.

COUNT II
PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL

26. ACE repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 25 as if they were fully set forth herein.

27. Prior to the incident Earl's Marina made a promise to Ms. Paolini that it would haul the vessel out of the water prior to the Storm.

28. Earl's Marina reasonably knew or expected that its promise to Ms. Paolini that it would haul the vessel out of the water prior to the Storm would induce Ms. Paolini to refrain from seeking or utilizing any other means of removing the vessel from the water prior to the Storm.

29. The promise by Earl's Marina that it would haul the vessel out of the water prior to the Storm induced Ms. Paolini to refrain from seeking or utilizing any other means of removing the vessel from the water prior to the Storm.

30. The failure of Earl's Marina to haul the vessel out of the water prior to the Storm as it had promised was the proximate cause of the damage suffered by the vessel at the time of the incident.

31. As a result of Earl's Marina's breaches, the vessel was damaged and the Paolinis incurred costs to repair the vessel.

WHEREFORE, the plaintiff, ACE, demands judgment against the defendant, Earl's Marina, in the amount of $18,920.00, together with interest and costs.

COUNT III
NEGLIGENCE

32. ACE repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 31 as if they were fully set forth herein.

33. Prior to the incident Earl's Marina owed a duty to Ms. Paolini to haul the vessel out of the water prior to the arrival of the Storm.

34. Earl's Marina breached its duty to Ms. Paolini in that it negligently failed to haul the vessel out of the water prior to the Storm.

35. It was foreseeable to Earl's Marina that its failure to remove the vessel from the water prior to the Storm might result in damage to the vessel.

36. Earl's Marina's negligence in failing to haul the vessel out of the water prior to the Storm was the proximate cause of the damage suffered by the vessel at the time of the incident.

37. As a result of Earl's Marina's negligence, the vessel was damaged and the Paolinis incurred costs to repair the vessel.

WHEREFORE, the plaintiff, ACE, demands judgment against the defendant, Earl's Marina in the amount of $18,920.00, together with interest and costs."

The provided text is an excerpt from a document filed in this case. For a full understanding of the case, one should read the complete court file, including the response.

Javascript is required to view this map.