Lord v. Maryland Casualty Co.
Opinion
Order affirmed. The petitioners show no error in the order
denying their application for leave to file “information in the nature of a [769] quo warranto” to raise the issue of the right of the respondent to decline to furnish them with motor vehicle insurance other than the minimum compulsory liability insurance. Nothing is averred to show “the exercise [by the respondent] of a franchise or privilege not conferred by law.” G. L. e. 249, § 6. Goddard v. Smithett, 3 Gray, 116, 120. See Gardner Trust Co. v. Whitehall Corp. 260 Mass. 239, 240. Compare Adams v. Hannah, 261 Mass. 125.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
202 N.E.2d 239 (Lord v. Maryland Casualty Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.