Preview
Ist
xe a
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
WORCESTER, SS. SUPERIOR COURT.DEPT.
OF THE TRIAL COURT
CIVIL ACTION
CV IH0l
NO. 2085 B
BAYSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
as Subrogee of Roberta Knox FILED
PLAINTIFF
DEC 28 2020
VS.
SIMPLISAFE, INC.
ATTEST- Mitin CLERK
DEFENDANT
COMPLAINT & CLAIM OF JURY TRIAL
FACTS
1. Plaintiff, BAYSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, is a Massachusetts
corporation duly authorized to do business in Worcester County, Massachusetts.
2. Defendant, SIMPLISAFE, INC., is a foreign corporation duly authorized to do
business in Massachusetts, with a registered agent for service at 294 Washington Street,
9" Floor, Boston, Suffolk County, Massachusetts.
3. The plaintiff wrote a policy of insurance covering the property owned by
Roberta Knox (hereinafter “Knox”), and located at 24 Village Hill Road, Williamsburg,
Massachusetts (hereinafter the “premises”), which policy was in effect for the period of
8/28/17 through 8/28/18.
4. On or about December 30, 2017, the premises were equipped with a’ security
system designed, manufactured, sold by and monitored by the defendant, SIMPLISAFE,
INC. (hereinafter “SimpliSafe), which security system included a freeze sensor and 24/7
professional alarm monitoring.
5. On or about December 30, 2017, the security system failed to provide
notification of a severe drop in temperature at the premises, resulting in frozen pipes and
extensive water damage to the premises.
6. The plaintiff paid to or on behalf of its insured, Robert Knox, in excess of
$135,000.00 for property damage to the premises and is therefore subrogated to the rights
of Knox for said amount.
COUNT 1 - NEGLIGENCE
Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 6 of plaintiff's complaint.
7. Defendant was negligent in its design, manufacture and/or monitoring of the
products supplied to Knox.
8. Asa result of the defendant’s’ negligence, the Knox premises suffered
property damage.
COUNT II —- BREACH OF CONTRACT
Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 — 6 of plaintiff's complaint.
9. SimpliSafe entered into a contractual agreement with Knox when it sold the
SimpliSafe security system to her.
10. Adequate consideration existed for the contractual agreement between Knox
and SimpliSafe.
11. SimpliSafe breached its contract by its faulty, substandard product, negligent
manner, and failure to fulfill its duties and obligations under the contract.
12. Asa result of SimpliSafe’s breach of its contract with Knox, the Knox
premises suffered extensive property damage.
COUNT II[— BREACH OF WARRANTY
13. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege paragraphs 1 — 15 of plaintiffs complaint.
14. Upon entering into a contractual arrangement with Knox, SimpliSafe gave
express and implied warranties that its product and services would be in compliance with
industry standards, would be suitable for the particular purpose that it was intended, and
that Knox would receive the benefit of the professional services promised.
15. By its substandard conduct, SimpliSafe has breached its express and implied
warranties.
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff, BAYSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY a/s/o
ROBERTA KNOX, demands judgment against the defendant, SIMPLISAFE, INC., in
the full amount of its damages plus interest, costs and attorneys’ fees.
-2-
AND, FURTHER, the plaintiff, BAYSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY,
claims a trial by jury on all the issues.
BAYSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY .a/s/o
ROBERT. Ox
BY ITS IRNEY
be
i a
tne>
Peter” A. Palmer, Esquire
Fuller, Rosenberg, Palmer & Beliveau, LLP
339 Main Street
Worcester, MA 01608
(508) 751-5115
BBO#551117
catperreault@frpb.com
Dated: December 28, 2020
Preview
Ist xe a COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS WORCESTER, SS. SUPERIOR COURT.DEPT. OF THE TRIAL COURT CIVIL ACTION CV IH0l NO. 2085 B BAYSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY as Subrogee of Roberta Knox FILED PLAINTIFF DEC 28 2020 VS. SIMPLISAFE, INC. ATTEST- Mitin CLERK DEFENDANT COMPLAINT & CLAIM OF JURY TRIAL FACTS 1. Plaintiff, BAYSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, is a Massachusetts corporation duly authorized to do business in Worcester County, Massachusetts. 2. Defendant, SIMPLISAFE, INC., is a foreign corporation duly authorized to do business in Massachusetts, with a registered agent for service at 294 Washington Street, 9" Floor, Boston, Suffolk County, Massachusetts. 3. The plaintiff wrote a policy of insurance covering the property owned by Roberta Knox (hereinafter “Knox”), and located at 24 Village Hill Road, Williamsburg, Massachusetts (hereinafter the “premises”), which policy was in effect for the period of 8/28/17 through 8/28/18. 4. On or about December 30, 2017, the premises were equipped with a’ security system designed, manufactured, sold by and monitored by the defendant, SIMPLISAFE, INC. (hereinafter “SimpliSafe), which security system included a freeze sensor and 24/7 professional alarm monitoring. 5. On or about December 30, 2017, the security system failed to provide notification of a severe drop in temperature at the premises, resulting in frozen pipes and extensive water damage to the premises. 6. The plaintiff paid to or on behalf of its insured, Robert Knox, in excess of $135,000.00 for property damage to the premises and is therefore subrogated to the rights of Knox for said amount. COUNT 1 - NEGLIGENCE Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 6 of plaintiff's complaint. 7. Defendant was negligent in its design, manufacture and/or monitoring of the products supplied to Knox. 8. Asa result of the defendant’s’ negligence, the Knox premises suffered property damage. COUNT II —- BREACH OF CONTRACT Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 — 6 of plaintiff's complaint. 9. SimpliSafe entered into a contractual agreement with Knox when it sold the SimpliSafe security system to her. 10. Adequate consideration existed for the contractual agreement between Knox and SimpliSafe. 11. SimpliSafe breached its contract by its faulty, substandard product, negligent manner, and failure to fulfill its duties and obligations under the contract. 12. Asa result of SimpliSafe’s breach of its contract with Knox, the Knox premises suffered extensive property damage. COUNT II[— BREACH OF WARRANTY 13. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege paragraphs 1 — 15 of plaintiffs complaint. 14. Upon entering into a contractual arrangement with Knox, SimpliSafe gave express and implied warranties that its product and services would be in compliance with industry standards, would be suitable for the particular purpose that it was intended, and that Knox would receive the benefit of the professional services promised. 15. By its substandard conduct, SimpliSafe has breached its express and implied warranties. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff, BAYSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY a/s/o ROBERTA KNOX, demands judgment against the defendant, SIMPLISAFE, INC., in the full amount of its damages plus interest, costs and attorneys’ fees. -2- AND, FURTHER, the plaintiff, BAYSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, claims a trial by jury on all the issues. BAYSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY .a/s/o ROBERT. Ox BY ITS IRNEY be i a tne> Peter” A. Palmer, Esquire Fuller, Rosenberg, Palmer & Beliveau, LLP 339 Main Street Worcester, MA 01608 (508) 751-5115 BBO#551117 catperreault@frpb.com Dated: December 28, 2020