AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Plaintiff filed a complaint against AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company and two individuals, alleging that she received communications from the Defendant that were misleading or omitted material information regarding the interest rates of her loans.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff: Argued that the dismissal of her complaint was in error because the intermittent injury rule should apply, triggering a new statute of limitations every time she received a misleading communication or one that omitted material information regarding the interest rates of her loans (para 2).
• Defendants: Supported the dismissal of the complaint on statute of limitations grounds, filed a memorandum in support of the court's proposed disposition to affirm the dismissal (para 1).

Legal Issues

• Whether the dismissal of the Plaintiff's complaint on statute of limitations grounds was in error.
• Whether the intermittent injury rule should apply, triggering a new statute of limitations with every misleading communication or omission of material information regarding the interest rates of the Plaintiff's loans.

Disposition

• The court affirmed the dismissal of the Plaintiff's complaint on statute of limitations grounds (para 4).

Reasons

• KRISTINA BOGARDUS, Judge, with MEGAN P. DUFFY, Judge, and JANE B. YOHALEM, Judge concurring, found that the Plaintiff failed to identify specific communications or establish the timeliness of those communications that were allegedly misleading or omitted material information regarding the interest rates of her loans. The court concluded that the Plaintiff did not meet her burden to demonstrate error in the dismissal of her complaint on statute of limitations grounds. The court's decision was also based on the Plaintiff's failure to provide adequate references to the record to support her arguments, as required by precedent cases cited (paras 2-3).