Case Name and Citation
NUNN vs. MASSACHUSETTS CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY 743 F.3d 365 (2014) Court of Appeals Second Circuit
Summary of the Key Facts in the Case
Ronald Nunn and Donald Vaden are former National Basketball Association referees. In September 1996, both plaintiffs were taking part in a referee training camp that was located in New Jersey and attended a union meeting that was hosted by the National Basketball Referees Association. While the meeting was in session, Steven Lucas, who is a sales representative for a company called Sun Life of Canada was introduced to the audience as a disability expert. Lucas explained in his presentation that the current insurance coverage that referees are receiving could potentially be …show more content…
The terms Lucas described in his presentation were not consistent with what was actually in writing. In 2002, Nunn suffered a knee injury that ended his career as an NBA referee and then in the next year, Donald Vaden suffered an injury that also ended his refereeing career in the NBA. Both plaintiffs were receiving their payments according to the insurance package and then sixty months later, both stopped receiving payments. Nunn was fifty eight years old and Vaden was fifty five years old. Both men were working other jobs with the NBA. Issue Presented by the Case
The first issue presented in this case refers to the allegation of the breach of contract for insurance coverage provided by Steven Lucas. The second issue presented in the case is whether or not Steven Lucas is responsible for providing false information to potential clients. The third issue presented in this case refers to the accountability of Nunn and Vaden examining the policy and what the insurance program entails.
Plaintiff …show more content…
The court referred to previous cases and one in particular, Tonkovic vs. State Farm Mutual. The insured again had requested a disability policy that would pay home mortgage if he became disabled. The insurance agent who was aware of what was being requested, did not make an attempt to inform Tonkovic that this policy would not coincide with the coverage that was being
NUNN vs. MASSACHUSETTS CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY 743 F.3d 365 (2014) Court of Appeals Second Circuit
Summary of the Key Facts in the Case
Ronald Nunn and Donald Vaden are former National Basketball Association referees. In September 1996, both plaintiffs were taking part in a referee training camp that was located in New Jersey and attended a union meeting that was hosted by the National Basketball Referees Association. While the meeting was in session, Steven Lucas, who is a sales representative for a company called Sun Life of Canada was introduced to the audience as a disability expert. Lucas explained in his presentation that the current insurance coverage that referees are receiving could potentially be …show more content…
The terms Lucas described in his presentation were not consistent with what was actually in writing. In 2002, Nunn suffered a knee injury that ended his career as an NBA referee and then in the next year, Donald Vaden suffered an injury that also ended his refereeing career in the NBA. Both plaintiffs were receiving their payments according to the insurance package and then sixty months later, both stopped receiving payments. Nunn was fifty eight years old and Vaden was fifty five years old. Both men were working other jobs with the NBA. Issue Presented by the Case
The first issue presented in this case refers to the allegation of the breach of contract for insurance coverage provided by Steven Lucas. The second issue presented in the case is whether or not Steven Lucas is responsible for providing false information to potential clients. The third issue presented in this case refers to the accountability of Nunn and Vaden examining the policy and what the insurance program entails.
Plaintiff …show more content…
The court referred to previous cases and one in particular, Tonkovic vs. State Farm Mutual. The insured again had requested a disability policy that would pay home mortgage if he became disabled. The insurance agent who was aware of what was being requested, did not make an attempt to inform Tonkovic that this policy would not coincide with the coverage that was being