Your browser (Internet Explorer 7 or lower) is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites. Learn how to update your browser.

X

Injury Claims In Massachusetts Must Be Timely Filed

As a Massachusetts resident, if you suffer an injury, you must timely file your claim. “A Boston resident, for example, would have to file their case at the appropriate court within three years from the time they knew about the injury,” notes Boston injury attorney Neil Burns, “if you fail to timely file, you lose your right to file, forever. If you’re injured, don’t delay in calling us.”

In a recent case at the Boston Municipal Court, the judge dismissed the case where a plaintiff filed a personal injury action against a defendant hair dye manufacturer after expiration of the applicable three-year statute of limitations. The Judge’s said that “The parties agree that the applicable statutes prescribe a three-year limitations period. … The parties also agree that the statutes of limitations began to run when [plaintiff Anne-Marie] Cormier had notice of the injury. The parties differ, however, as to the date on which Cormier knew, or should have known of her injury. Cormier claims that for statute of limitations purposes, she did not learn, and could not have learned, of her injuries until after she was examined by the dermatologist. [Defendant] L’Oreal [Paris] maintains that the statutes of limitations began to run when Cormier reasonably knew she was injured and that her injury may have been caused by L’Oreal.

“‘The statute of limitations starts to run when an event or events have occurred that were reasonably likely to put the plaintiff on notice that someone may have caused her injury.’ … Further, ‘the plaintiff need not know the full extent of the injury before the statute starts to run.’ … The undisputed record before us shows that Cormier knew she had suffered an injury as a result of her hair coloring by the time she went to the hospital’s emergency room. The record also clearly indicates that Cormier reported her injuries to L’Oreal on May 22, 2003. The record is devoid of anything that would permit a court to question these facts. Anyone in Cormier’s position should have known that any injuries she sustained were caused by L’Oreal no later than May 22, 2003; therefore, the statutes of limitations expired by May 22, 2006 at the latest – nine days before this action was commenced. …