Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 175, § 113E (2026)

Deposit premiums

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 113E. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prohibit an insurance company, its agent or any broker, from requiring a deposit premium before issuance of a policy or execution of a bond, providing the per vehicle deposit does not exceed thirty per cent of the annual premium or the full short term premium for the insurance requested, whichever is less, unless the applicant has been in default in the payment of any premium for automobile insurance during the preceding twenty-four months.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1977–2006 · leading case: Com. Ins. v. Comm'r of Ins., 447 Mass. 478 (Mass. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Com. Ins. v. Comm'r of Ins., 447 Mass. 478 (Mass. 2006). “The 1973 legislation also rewrote G. L. c. 175, § 113E, to provide: “(a) No insurance company shall refuse to issue or execute as surety a motor vehicle policy or bond both as defined in [G.”

Maryland Cas. Co. v. Comm'r of Ins., 363 N.E.2d 1087 (Mass. 1977). “175, § 22E, by refusing to renew insurance policies at the option of the policyholder for reasons other than those specified as permissible under that section; (3) Maryland Casualty violated G. L. c. 175, § 113E, by refusing to issue automobile insurance policies for reasons…”

Com. Ins. Co. v. Comm'r of Ins., 19 Mass. L. Rptr. 441 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2005). · cites it 6× “" G.L.c. 175, §113E (1973). The “take all comers” rule was enacted by replacing the former G.”

Bowler v. Arthur Andersen, LLP, 20 Mass. L. Rptr. 85 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2005). “It did so by eliminating G.L.c. 175, §113E (1973), which had forbidden any insurance company from refusing to issue a motor vehicle policy to a qualified applicant (except one without a valid driver’s license or with unpaid premiums) and effectively replacing it with two…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.