ÿWPC" UŽëWÄ1ÿÅ®ÙûÓ®5dW L ™I¥XI?…ж™JÈMŒëWÄW!Åõ¹#.…®E@ü~d©ox® Å$]PìoµóD«*]Txí~¿D’ÛÿŠÕ+­ô=;X/r¤!ŠL7>HňÙÖõZ‘:ýõS [ÃÛ'® ` »Ʀ±ùe"x¥8f¾° ÒJû2‹÷Œ…'Þ:^讞uñÑ Þ>8Q}t:sþòé-kK@ ;³¹˜ô¤K³®½Ø”[$àZž!'.ð\­üõÊÙÆà9äiÍI;¿ãž(YÆXtú´ÅÕØXÏå8\í”B¢Á’ –¤{ÖK–U“Ü ^ ¡KqZÄ<—®AÅáYAþŒ=™ËR÷ªy;p1·6¬‹^ u²*»·Ôþá½=FÄ2ÙhÆüQ¢!ÉÊŠ×2βÌ7˸S b ÂŽÌ\„"~÷c&f€†žaèÇ×WÔq—•fÜŠU#Óß,Ðú*›toƒu¢_÷4<´ZÚÚCòÉ!‡õ[Èš¡y2øuQ‚­4lÌ?Q,’|úKïà½é¢Ý;A„©Á¯ßA}øÛL­ˆ’Pî°ÝTB1õê¹3º[@¶9 Ÿë»_ÁŸu(#Á0 %ñ 0D÷ 0G;U:‚ 0å¼U 8¡nTÙN- U@/ o Nw 1uy ^ î wú 4þ E f a * 9 m; 72R 0c„ Ïç b¶ ¾¾¾ 0cÊL-UFyUF¿¿¿¿¿¿ B˜HP LaserJet 5/5M - StandardÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0X(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(ž¹$¡¡Ô€Xù™XXXÔ<þ6X9`("Courier NewTT(ƒ:2xl$¤¤Ý ƒž¹!ÝÔ€XYXXXÔÝ  ÝÓ=€YÐXdÐd=ÓÓ  Óà  àÓÓòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó<4šÛ 9Z+‹ Courier New «<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTXXxþ6X@ÉDQX@<þ6X9`(CourierTTXXwþ6X@ÉüQX@(ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman  3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)Àî.s ×Kè.?,}›backupøÀTABLE A 3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ i)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à ÅÝ ƒxl$ÝÔ€XE@XXXÔÓ=€E@ÐXdÐd=ÓÓ  Óà  àÓÓòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÓ=€E@XÐXdÐXd=ÓIn€her€reply€brief,€Ô_ÔLoguidiceÔ_Ô€appears€to€suggest€that€herÐ ° Ðsubstantive€claim€for€breach€of€fiduciary€duty€was€sufficient€toÐ †Ö Ðpreserve€her€argument€in€favor€of€tolling€on€the€basis€ofÐ \¬ Ðfraudulent€concealment.€€We€disagree.€€"Overburdened€trial€judgesÐ 2‚ Ðcannot€be€expected€to€be€mind€readers.€€If€claims€are€merelyÐ X Ðinsinuated€rather€than€actually€articulated€in€the€trial€court,€weÐ Þ. Ðwill€ordinarily€refuse€to€deem€them€preserved€for€appellateÐ ´  Ðreview."€€òòMcCoyóó€v.€òòMassachusetts€Inst.€of€Tech.óó,€950€F.2d€13,€22Ð Š Ú Ð(1st€Cir.€1991).€€Ô_ÔLoguidiceÔ_Ô€has€failed€to€present€us€with€anyÐ ` ° Ðdeveloped€argument€against€application€of€this€rule,€and€we€do€notÐ 6 †  Ðsee€any€basis€for€excusing€her€procedural€default.- ù- Ý ƒxl$ÝÔ€XE@XXXÔÓ=€E@ÐXdÐd=ÓÓ  Óà  àÓÓòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÓ=€E@XÐXdÐXd=ÓThe€parties€reasonably€have€agreed€that€Massachusetts€lawÐ ° Ðgoverns€this€dispute,€so€we€follow€their€lead.€€òòSeeóó€òòFoster„Miller,Ð †Ö ÐInc.óó€v.€òòBabcock€&€Wilcox€Canadaóó,€210€F.3d€1,€8€(1st€Cir.€2000).€€(;3Ô$©©Ý ƒž¹!ÝÔ€XYXXXÔÝ  Ý BÝ ƒxl$ÝÔ€XE@XXXÔÓ=€E@ÐXdÐd=ÓÓ  Óà  àÓÓòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÓ=€E@XÐXdÐXd=ÓA€whole€life€insurance€policy€provides€a€death€benefit€andÐ ° Ðbuilds€cash€value€(which€is€available€to€the€insured€during€herÐ †Ö Ðlifetime)€as€premiums€are€paid.€€MetLife€whole€life€policyholdersÐ \¬ Ðalso€are€eligible€to€receive€dividends€if€MetLife€declares€any.<4šÛ 9Z+‹.Courier New Regular.Courier New Regular dÝ ƒž¹!ÝÔ€XE@XXXÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑTRY,3Ø'Xà3Ø' Letter 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÑ ? ÑÙ*ƒ !Ùò òÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÔ‡°9´°XXE@ÔÔ‡ °2æ°°°9´ÔÓ=€ E@ XÐXdÐd=ÓUnited€States€Court€of€AppealsÔ#†°9´°° °2æ#ÔÔ#†XE@X°°9´ä#ÔÐ ° ÐÔ‡„ZU„XXE@ÔÔ‡ „‹„„„ZUÔFor€the€First€CircuitÔ#†„ZU„„ „‹÷#ÔÔ#†XE@X„„ZUØ#Ôó óÐ „Ô ÐÓØÓà  àà ` àà ¸ àÌÌßA€') °°` dE< ` AßÐ  à ÐÌNo.€02„2538Ð u Å ÐÌà@ðð"ìàBRENDA€Ô_ÔLOGUIDICEÔ_Ô,ˆÐ ! q ÐÌà@ ìàPlaintiff,€Appellant,ˆÐ Í   ÐÌà@tt)ìàv.ˆÐ yÉ  ÐÌà@¸ ¸ ìàMETROPOLITAN€LIFE€INSURANCE€COMPANYˆÐ %u  Ðà@ ìàand€STEVEN€ANASTASIA,ˆÐ ûK  ÐÌà@ÄÄìàDefendants,€Appellees.ˆÐ §÷ ÐÌßA€') °°` dE<R` AßÐ S£ ÐÌà@œ œ ìàAPPEAL€FROM€THE€UNITED€STATES€DISTRICT€COURTˆÐ 8ˆ ÐÌà@0 0 ìàFOR€THE€DISTRICT€OF€MASSACHUSETTSˆÐ ä4 ÐÌà@` ` ìà[Hon.€Frank€H.€Freedman,€òòU.S.€District€Judgeóó]ˆÐ à ÐÌßA€') °°` dE<;` AßÐ <Œ ÐÌà@„„'ìàBeforeˆÐ !q ÐÌÓ  ÓLipez,€òòCircuit€Judgeóó,Ð Í ÐÔ_ÔPorfilioÔ_Ô,*€òòSenior€Circuit€Judgeóó,Ð £ó  Ðand€Howard,€òòCircuit€Judgeóó.Ð yÉ! ÐÌßA€') °°` dE<$!` AßÐ %!u# ÐÌÓ  ÓÓ  Óà  àòòKenneth€R.€Ô_ÔBehrendÔ_Ôóó,€with€whom€òòÔ_ÔBehrendÔ_Ô€&€Ô_ÔErnsbergerÔ_Ô,€P.C.óó,€wereÐ  "Z% Ðon€brief,€for€appellant.Ð à"0& Ðà  àòòB.€John€Ô_ÔPendletonÔ_Ô,€Jr.óó,€with€whom€òòÔ_ÔMcCarterÔ_Ô€&€English,€Ô_ÔLLPÔ_Ôóó,Ð ¶#' Ðwere€on€brief,€for€appellees.Ð Œ$Ü( ÐÌÌÔ*‹ƒ'ddd Xdd Xdd X°(#°(#‹ÔÔ,( dd ÔÔ,( dd ÔÔ,( dd ÔÔ+  ÔÐ '^"+'^" ‹‹ÐÓÊÓÐ SIr'Â", àvâ@37815„„‰àvâ@‰‹‹SÐÌJuly€14,€2003Ð H(˜#. ÐÐ RHC)n$/" àvâ@37815 àvâ@ ‹‹RÐÐ(r'Â"0  (ÐÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð Ð+ '2 Ðà  àóó*Of€the€Tenth€Circuit,€sitting€by€designation.Ð  ¦,ö'3? ÐÔ_ÔÓÓÑ8€!E@!XXdÖdÈ8ÑÓ=€E@XÐXd XÐXd=ÓÑ€Ñà  àÛÛÙ*ž¹!Ùà ` àò òHOWARD,€òòCircuit€Judgeóó.€€ó óPlaintiff€Brenda€LoguidiceÐ ° Ðappeals€the€district€court's€entry€of€summary€judgment€in€favor€ofÐ xÈ Ðdefendants€Metropolitan€Life€Insurance€Company€("MetLife")€andÐ $t ÐSteven€Anastasia€on€the€ground€that€her€claims€against€them€wereÐ Ð  Ðbrought€after€the€expiration€of€the€applicable€MassachusettsÐ | Ì Ðstatute€of€limitations.€€The€principal€issue€is€whether€LoguidiceÐ ( x  Ðhas€adduced€evidence€from€which€a€fact€finder€could€conclude€thatÐ Ô$  Ðher€otherwise€untimely€claims€are€saved€by€the€Commonwealth'sÐ €Ð  Ð"discovery€rule."€€While€we€are€troubled€by€the€alleged€eventsÐ ,|  Ðgiving€rise€to€this€lawsuit,€we€see€no€basis€for€applying€theÐ Ø( Ðdiscovery€rule€to€Loguidice's€claims.€€We€therefore€affirm€theÐ „Ô Ðdistrict€court's€judgment.€€Ð 0€ Ðà@tt)ìàI.ˆÐ Ü, Ðà  àà ` àWe€primarily€take€the€facts€from€the€first€of€theÐ ˆØ Ðdistrict€court's€two€summary€judgment€rulings,€òòseeóó€òòinfraóó,Ð 4„ Ðconstruing€the€record€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€Loguidice€andÐ à0 Ðresolving€all€factual€disputes€in€her€favor.€€òòE.g.óó,€òòDwanóó€v.€òòCity€ofÐ ŒÜ  ÐBostonóó,€329€F.3d€275,€277€(1st€Cir.€2003).€€In€any€event,€most€ofÐ 8!ˆ" Ðthe€following€facts€are€undisputed.€€Ð ä"4$ Ðà  àà ` àAt€some€point€in€1991,€Loguidice,€a€nurse€and€theÐ $à& Ðdivorced€mother€of€two,€received€a€letter€from€MetLife's€South€EastÐ <&Œ!( ÐHome€Office€in€Tampa,€Florida.€€The€letter€encouraged€Loguidice€toÐ è'8#* Ðlearn€more€about€a€"retirement€plan"€that€MetLife€had€designedÐ ”)ä$, Ðespecially€for€nurses.€€At€the€time,€nurses€frequently€lackedÐ @+&. Ðretirement€plans€at€their€places€of€employment.€€LoguidiceÐ ° Ðexpressed€interest€in€learning€more€about€MetLife's€program.€€InÐ \¬ ÐNovember€1991,€Anastasia,€who€was€then€an€account€representativeÐ X Ðworking€out€of€MetLife's€Tampa€office,€visited€Loguidice€in€herÐ ´  Ðhome€in€Agawam,€Massachusetts.Ð ` ° Ðà  àà ` àDuring€the€meeting,€Anastasia€held€himself€out€as€aÐ  \  Ðspecialist€in€retirement€programs€designed€to€meet€the€needs€ofÐ ¸  Ðnurses.€€He€presented€Loguidice€with€a€scripted€sales€pitch,€usingÐ d´  Ða€folder€of€information€(including€newspaper€articles€andÐ `  Ðpromotional€materials)€that€was€arranged€so€as€to€emphasize€toÐ ¼  Ðnurses€the€importance€of€retirement€planning€and€the€strengths€ofÐ h¸ ÐMetLife.€€Within€the€twenty„two€pages€of€material€that€comprisedÐ d Ðthe€folder,€there€is€very€little€mention€of€life€insurance.€€ThisÐ À Ðis€more€than€a€little€surprising€because€Anastasia's€objective€wasÐ l¼ Ðto€sell€Loguidice€a€whole€life€insurance€policy.ØØ×ƒ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð h Ðà  à€€€At€some€point€during€the€meeting,€the€issue€of€lifeÐ Ä Ðinsurance€did€come€up.€€Loguidice€conceded€in€her€deposition€thatÐ pÀ  ÐAnastasia€informed€her€(after€she€had€told€him€that€she€did€notÐ !l" Ðwant€or€need€life€insurance)€that€there€was€a€life€insuranceÐ È"$ Ðcomponent€to€the€plan.€€Documentary€evidence€reveals€that€AnastasiaÐ t$Ä& Ðalso€asked€Loguidice€a€number€of€the€health€and€lifestyle€questionsÐ  &p!( Ðthat€typically€are€asked€in€connection€with€applications€for€lifeÐ ° Ðinsurance.€€Nonetheless,€Anastasia's€emphasis€was€at€all€times€onÐ \¬ Ðthe€retirement€planning€in€which€Loguidice€had€expressed€anÐ X Ðinterest.€€At€the€conclusion€of€the€meeting,€Loguidice€signed€aÐ ´  Ðdocument€with€the€heading€"Application€for€Life€Insurance"€thatÐ ` ° Ðauthorized€MetLife€to€deduct€$100€per€month€from€her€checkingÐ  \  Ðaccount€to€pay€the€premiums€on€a€whole€life€policy€with€a€faceÐ ¸  Ðvalue€of€$52,096.€€Because€Loguidice€was€rushing€to€bring€theÐ d´  Ðmeeting€to€a€conclusion,€she€did€not€read€the€application.€Ð `  ÐInstead,€she€merely€signed€on€the€signature€line€at€which€AnastasiaÐ ¼  Ðwas€pointing.Ð h¸ Ðà  àà ` àAfter€making€the€sale,€Anastasia€left€Loguidice€with€aÐ d Ðbrochure€titled€"Nurses€Insured€Retirement€Plan."€€The€brochureÐ À Ðmirrored€the€folder€in€that€it€emphasized€retirement€planning€andÐ l¼ Ðbarely€even€hinted€that€"the€plan"€was,€in€actuality,€a€lifeÐ h Ðinsurance€policy.€€For€example,€the€brochure€stated€thatÐ Ä Ð"Metropolitan's€Nurses€Insured€Retirement€Plan€is€a€convenient€wayÐ pÀ  Ðfor€you€to€accumulate€cash€for€the€future€you€deserve,"€and€thatÐ !l" Ð"we€can€help€you€build€a€solid€foundation€of€financial€securityÐ È"$ Ðwith€our€Nurses€Insured€Retirement€Plan,€which€can€help€youÐ t$Ä& Ðaccumulate€the€money€you€need,€tax„deferred,€for€your€retirementÐ  &p!( Ðyears."€€The€closest€the€brochure€came€to€indicating€that€the€planÐ Ì'#* Ðwas€no€more€than€a€whole€life€policy€is€a€statement€included€in€anÐ x)È$, Ðitemized€summary€of€five€benefits€of€the€"òònewóó€[our€emphasis]Ð $+t&. ÐInsured€Retirement€plan":€"[The€plan€provides€t]ax€deferredÐ ° Ðaccumulation€while€providing€a€life€insurance€benefit."€Ð \¬ Ðà  àà ` àTwo€weeks€after€their€initial€meeting,€Anastasia€returnedÐ X Ðto€Loguidice's€home€to€deliver€"the€plan"€she€had€purchased.€Ð ´  ÐAnastasia€had€with€him€a€folder€containing€the€same€documents€thatÐ ` ° Ðhe€had€used€in€his€previous€presentation.€€On€a€computer€print„outÐ  \  Ðnear€the€back,€Anastasia€had€highlighted€the€anticipated€value€ofÐ ¸  Ð"the€plan"€when€Loguidice€turned€65€„„€$66,699€„„€under€a€columnÐ d´  Ðtitled€"Illustrative€Cash€Value."€€During€this€second€meetingÐ `  Ð(which€was€quite€brief),€Anastasia€showed€Loguidice€the€highlightedÐ ¼  Ðfigure.€€But€Anastasia€did€not€review€the€details€of€the€actualÐ h¸ Ðinsurance€policy€that€Loguidice€had€purchased.€€Instead,€he€tuckedÐ d Ðthe€policy€itself€into€a€sleeve€in€the€back€of€the€folder€and€leftÐ À Ðthe€folder€with€Loguidice.€€Loguidice€did€not€look€at€the€folderÐ l¼ Ðagain€until€after€she€had€filed€suit€some€four€and€one„half€yearsÐ h Ðlater.Ð Ä Ðà  àà ` àFor€approximately€the€next€two€and€one„half€years,Ð pÀ  ÐLoguidice€made€her€monthly€$100€premium€payments.€€During€thisÐ !l" Ðtime,€Loguidice€did€not€know€that€she€was€making€premium€paymentsÐ È"$ Ðon€a€whole€life€insurance€policy.€€Rather,€she€thought€that€she€wasÐ t$Ä& Ðcontributing€to€a€"retirement€plan"€with€a€life€insuranceÐ  &p!( Ðcomponent.€€Then,€in€May€1994,€Loguidice€read€a€newspaper€articleÐ Ì'#* Ðdetailing€an€impending€class„action€settlement€involving€MetLifeÐ x)È$, Ðand€nurses€who€had€purchased€whole€life€policies€after€being€led€toÐ $+t&. Ðbelieve€that€they€were€investing€in€retirement€or€savings€plans.€Ð ° ÐShortly€thereafter,€Loguidice€stopped€paying€her€monthly€premiumsÐ \¬ Ðand€called€MetLife€to€ask€that€her€policy€be€cancelled.€€MetLifeÐ X Ðdid€not€cancel€Loguidice's€policy.€€Instead,€per€language€in€theÐ ´  Ðpolicy€governing€unpaid€premiums,€MetLife€began€using€the€cashÐ ` ° Ðvalue€that€had€accumulated€in€the€policy€to€pay€Loguidice'sÐ  \  Ðpremiums€as€they€became€due.€€On€September€18,€1996,€with€itsÐ ¸  Ðaccumulated€cash€value€exhausted,€the€policy€lapsed.Ð d´  Ðà  àà ` àLoguidice€opted€out€of€the€class„action€settlement€and,Ð `  Ðin€May€1996,€initiated€this€diversity€action€in€the€United€StatesÐ ¼  ÐDistrict€Court€for€the€Western€District€of€Pennsylvania.€€HerÐ h¸ Ðcomplaint€asserted€claims€for€breach€of€contract;€breach€of€theÐ d Ðduty€of€good€faith€and€fair€dealing;€fraud€and€deceit;€negligentÐ À Ðsupervision;€negligent€misrepresentation;€negligence€per€se;€breachÐ l¼ Ðof€fiduciary€duty;€and€violation€of€various€Massachusetts€consumerÐ h Ðprotection€statutes.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Following€a€transfer€to€the€district€courtÐ Ä Ðfrom€which€this€appeal€was€taken€and€the€close€of€discovery,Ð pÀ  ÐMetLife€moved€for€summary€judgment,€challenging€the€viability€ofÐ !l" Ðthe€claims€on€evidentiary€and,€as€to€Loguidice's€tort€and€statutoryÐ È"$ Ðclaims,€statute€of€limitations€grounds.€€Anastasia,€acting€pro€se,Ð t$Ä& Ðjoined€in€MetLife's€motion.€€On€March€16,€1999,€the€court€grantedÐ  &p!( Ðthe€motion€on€all€claims€except€those€for€fraud€and€deceit,€breachÐ Ì'#* Ðof€fiduciary€duty,€and€violation€of€one€of€the€consumer€protectionÐ ° Ðstatutes€identified€in€the€complaint,€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€93A.€Ð \¬ ÐAs€to€these€claims,€the€court€concluded€that€the€evidence€wasÐ X Ðsufficient€to€warrant€a€trial€and€that€the€claims€were€broughtÐ ´  Ðwithin€the€applicable€limitations€period.€€In€reaching€the€latterÐ ` ° Ðconclusion,€the€court€determined€that€the€claims,€while€sounding€inÐ  \  Ðtort,€were€essentially€contractual€in€nature.€€òòSeeóóòòHendricksonóó€v.Ð ¸  ÐòòSearsóó,€310€N.E.2d€131,€132€(Mass.€1974)€(observing€that€the€"gistÐ d´  Ðof€the€action€or€the€essential€nature€of€the€plaintiff's€claim"Ð `  Ðrather€than€"the€form€of€proceeding"€determines€the€applicableÐ ¼  Ðstatute€of€limitations)€(internal€quotation€marks€omitted).€Ð h¸ ÐòòóóTherefore,€the€court€decided,€the€claims€were€governed€by€the€six„Ð d Ðyear€statute€of€limitations€generally€applicable€to€actions€forÐ À Ðcontractual€damages,€òòóóMass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€260,€ðð2€(1992),€andÐ l¼ Ðnot€the€three„year€statute€generally€used€in€tort€actions€andÐ h Ðcontract€actions€for€personal€injuries,€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.Ð Ä Ð260,€ðð€2A€(1992),€or€the€four„year€statute€usually€applied€toÐ pÀ  Ðactions€under€ch.€93A,€òòóóMass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€260,€ðð€5A€(1992).€Ð !l" ÐBecause€the€claims€were€brought€four€and€one„half€years€afterÐ È"$ ÐAnastasia€delivered€the€policy€to€Loguidice,€they€were€timely€underÐ t$Ä& Ðthe€court's€reasoning.Ð  &p!( Ðà  àà ` àIn€March€2002,€MetLife€filed€a€second€motion€for€summaryÐ Ì'#* Ðjudgment€on€Loguidice's€remaining€claims,€which€the€district€courtÐ x)È$, Ðtreated€as€having€been€filed€on€behalf€of€Anastasia€as€well.€€TheÐ $+t&. Ðmotion€contended€that€two€decisions€handed€down€by€the€AppealsÐ ° ÐDivision€of€the€Massachusetts€District€Court€after€the€initialÐ \¬ Ðsummary€judgment€decision€required€the€court€to€revisit€its€earlierÐ X Ðstatute€of€limitations€ruling.€€The€cases€in€questionòòóó€had€held€thatÐ ´  Ðthe€two„year€limitations€period€in€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€175,€ððÐ ` ° Ð181€(1998)€(permitting,òòóó€òòinteróó€òòaliaóó,€persons€induced€to€purchase€Ð  \  Ðinsurance€policies€based€on€misrepresentations€concerning€theirÐ ¸  Ðterms€to€sue€and€recover€premiums),€applies€to€òòallóó€claims€mirroringÐ d´  Ðthe€cause€of€action€set€forth€in€the€statute,€even€if€those€claimsÐ `  Ðare€brought€under€the€common€law€or€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€93A.€Ð ¼  ÐòòSeeóó€òòGrandeóó€v.€òòPFL€Life€Ins.€Co.óó,€No.€9663,€2000€WL€1376676€at€*2Ð h¸ Ð(Mass.€App.€Div.€Sep.€27,€2000)òòóó€(applying€the€òòHendricksonóórule€andÐ d Ðemphasizing€that€the€"gravamen€of€[the]€complaint"€and€not€the€formÐ À Ðin€which€it€designates€its€claims€controls€for€statute€ofÐ l¼ Ðlimitations€purposes)€(internal€quotation€marks€and€citationÐ h Ðomitted);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòSlingsbyóóv.€òòMetropolitan€Ins.€Co.óó,€No.€9708,Ð Ä Ð2001€WL€389347,€at€*2€(Mass.€App.€Div.€Apr.€4,€2001)(followingÐ pÀ  ÐòòGrandeóó).Ð !l" Ðà  àà ` àThe€district€court€did€not€accept€MetLife's€contentionÐ È"$ Ðthat€these€cases€obliged€it€to€reconsider€its€prior€ruling€becauseÐ t$Ä& Ðneither€decision€issued€from€a€court€capable€of€establishingÐ  &p!( Ðcontrolling€Massachusetts€law.€€Nonetheless,€concluding€thatÐ Ì'#* Ð"plaintiff's€remaining€claims€are€plainly€founded€upon€allegationsÐ x)È$, Ðof€misrepresentations€made€in€the€sale€of€products€governed€byÐ $+t&. Ð[Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€175,€ðð€181],"€the€court€granted€MetLifeÐ ° Ðand€Anastasia€summary€judgment€on€those€claims,€which€were€filedÐ \¬ Ðwell€more€than€two€years€after€Loguidice€received€her€policy.€Ð X ÐòòLoguidiceóóv.€òòMetropolitan€Life€Ins.óó,€Civ.€No.€97„10060„FHF,€slipÐ ´  Ðop.€at€5€(D.€Mass.€Oct.€11,€2002)€(memorandum€and€order)Ð ` ° Ð("òòLoguidice€IIóó").€€In€so€ruling,€the€court€did€not€respond€toÐ  \  ÐLoguidice's€alternative€argument,€made€in€opposition€to€both€ofÐ ¸  ÐMetLife's€summary€judgment€motions,€that€its€claims€were€saved€byÐ d´  ÐMassachusetts'€"discovery€rule"€even€if€the€two„,€three„,€and/orÐ `  Ðfour„year€limitations€periods€in,€respectively,€Mass.€Gen.€LawsÐ ¼  ÐAnn.€ch.€175,€ðð€181,€Mass.€Gen.€Laws.€ch.€260,€ðð€2A,€and/or€Mass.Ð h¸ ÐGen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€260,€ðð€5A,€were€deemed€applicable.€€LoguidiceÐ d Ðappeals€from€the€judgment€in€favor€of€MetLife€and€Anastasia€on€herÐ À Ðfraud€and€deceit,€breach€of€fiduciary€duty,€and€Mass.€Gen.€LawsÐ l¼ ÐAnn.€ch.€93A€claims.Ð h Ðà@88)ìàII.ˆÐ Ä ÐÓ °X°œXÓà  àà ` àLoguidice€leads€with€an€argument€that€the€district€courtÐ pÀ  Ðdid€violence€to€the€purpose€of€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€175,€ðð€181Ð !l" Ðby€applying€its€two„year€limitations€period€to€her€claims€for€fraudÐ È"$ Ðand€deceit,€breach€of€fiduciary€duty,€and€violations€of€Mass.€Gen.Ð t$Ä& ÐLaws€Ann.€ch.€93A.€€Loguidice€constructs€her€argument€logically:€Ð  &p!( Ðher€claims€are€for€the€unlawful€victimization€of€a€consumer;€butÐ Ì'#* Ðfor€ðð€181,€these€claims€would€be€subjected€to€longer€limitationsÐ x)È$, Ðperiods;€ðð€181€is€part€of€a€consumer€protection€statute;€therefore,Ð $+t&. Ðit€would€undermine€the€statute's€consumer„friendly€design€to€applyÐ ° Ðits€relatively€short€limitations€period€in€these€circumstances.Ð \¬ Ðà  àà ` àWhatever€merit€Loguidice's€syllogism€might€possess,€itÐ X Ðneglects€to€account€for€the€fact€that,€irrespective€of€Mass.€Gen.Ð ´  ÐLaws€Ann.€ch.€175,€ðð€181,€her€fraud€and€deceit,€breach€of€fiduciaryÐ ` ° Ðduty,€and€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€93A€claims€are€time„barredÐ  \  Ð(absent€application€of€the€discovery€rule,€which€we€discuss€òòinfraóó)Ð ¸  Ðunless€the€district€court€was€correct€when€it€initially€found€theÐ d´  Ðgist€of€these€claims€to€be€contractual€and€thus€governed€by€theÐ `  Ðsix„year€limitations€period€specified€in€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.Ð ¼  Ð260,€ðð€2.€€The€reason€is€that€Loguidice€did€not€bring€these€claimsÐ h¸ Ðuntil€four€and€one„half€years€after€receiving€her€insuranceÐ d Ðcontract.€€The€claims€are€thus€presumptively€untimely€under€notÐ À Ðonly€ðð€181,€but€also€under€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€260,€ðð€2A€andÐ l¼ ÐMass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€260,€ðð€5A.€€à p àà È àÐ h Ðà  àà ` àWe€regard€as€telling€Loguidice's€failure€to€defend€theÐ Ä Ðdistrict€court's€initial€statute€of€limitations€ruling,€even€in€theÐ pÀ  Ðface€of€MetLife's€argument€that€we€should€affirm€regardless€whetherÐ !l" Ðwe€deem€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€175,€ðð€181€applicable€(or€evenÐ È"$ Ðreach€the€issue).€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòHoulton€Citizens'€Coalitionóó€v.€òòTownÐ t$Ä& Ðof€Houltonóó,€175€F.3d€178,€184€(1st€Cir.€1999)€(appeals€court€mayÐ  &p!( Ðaffirm€entry€of€summary€judgment€on€"any€ground€revealed€by€theÐ Ì'#* Ðrecord").€€As€we€understand€it,€the€court's€initial€decision€toÐ x)È$, Ðapply€the€six„year€statute€of€limitations€to€the€fraud€and€deceit,Ð $+t&. Ðbreach€of€fiduciary€duty,€and€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€93A€claimsÐ ° Ðwas€driven€by€its€understanding€that€aspects€of€these€claims€aroseÐ \¬ Ðout€of€the€defendants'€failure€to€do€as€they€promised€in€theÐ X Ðalleged€agreement€reached€with€Loguidice€to€provide€her€with€aÐ ´  Ðretirement€plan.€€òòSeeóó€òòLoguidiceóó€v.€òòMetropolitan€Life€Ins.óó,€Civ.€No.Ð ` ° Ð97„10060„FHF,€slip€op.€at€7„8€(D.€Mass.€March€16,€1999)€(memorandumÐ  \  Ðand€order)€("òòLoguidice€Ióó")€(citing€òòBarberóóv.€òòFoxóó,€632€N.E.2d€1246,Ð ¸  Ð1249€(Mass.€App.€Ct.€1994)€(applying€six„year€statute€ofÐ d´  Ðlimitations€to€fraud€and€breach€of€fiduciary€duty€claims€arisingÐ `  Ðout€a€defendant's€alleged€failure€to€perform€under€an€agreement€toÐ ¼  Ðconvey€land)).€€In€other€words,€the€court€elected€to€apply€aÐ h¸ Ðcontract„based€limitations€period€to€the€claims€because€plaintiffÐ d Ðhad€made€allegations€challenging€defendants'€conduct€òòafteróóÐ À ÐLoguidice€purchased€a€MetLife€plan.Ð l¼ Ðà  àà ` àThe€problem€with€this€reasoning€is€that,€of€the€threeÐ h Ðclaims€that€survived€the€district€court's€initial€summary€judgmentÐ Ä Ðruling€(the€correctness€of€which€Loguidice€does€not€dispute),€onlyÐ pÀ  Ðthe€breach€of€fiduciary€duty€claim€can€be€read€to€condemn€post„Ð !l" Ðpurchase€conduct.€€òòSeeóó€Compl.€ðððð€55(b)€and€56(b)€(alleging,€òòinteróóÐ È"$ Ðòòaliaóó,€that€defendants€breached€their€fiduciary€duty€to€Loguidice€byÐ t$Ä& Ðfailing€to€use€the€money€Loguidice€gave€them€for€the€purposes€forÐ  &p!( Ðwhich€it€was€entrusted€„„€to€fund€a€retirement€plan).€€Moreover,€byÐ Ì'#* Ðthe€time€discovery€was€completed€and€the€parties€had€filed€theirÐ x)È$, Ðsummary€judgment€papers,€Loguidice€had€abandoned€the€post„purchase„Ð $+t&. Ðconduct€component€of€this€claim,€arguing€only€that€Anastasia€(and,Ð ° Ðby€extension,€MetLife)€had€breached€a€fiduciary€duty€to€herÐ \¬ Ð"during"€and€"at€the€time€of€the€sale"€of€the€insurance€policy.€Ð X ÐLoguidice€Mem.€Opp'n€Summ.€J.€at€46,€49.€€The€alleged€breaches€ofÐ ´  Ðlegal€duties€here,€having€been€committed€by€the€defendants€prior€to€Ð ` ° Ðthe€formation€of€any€agreement,€are€essentially€tortious€(thus,Ð  \  ÐLoguidice's€fraud„in„the„inducement€claim);€they€are€not€properlyÐ ¸  Ðregarded€as€contractual€in€"gist."€€òòHendricksonóó,€310€N.E.2d€at€132.€Ð d´  ÐAccordingly,€regardless€whether€the€two„year€limitations€period€inÐ `  ÐMass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€175,€ðð€181€or€the€three„€or€four„yearÐ ¼  Ðlimitations€periods€in,€respectively,€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€260,Ð h¸ Ððððð€2A€and€5A€are€deemed€applicable€(a€matter€of€state€law€that€weÐ d Ðneed€not€and€do€not€decide),€Loguidice's€claims€are€untimely€unlessÐ À Ðsaved€by€the€Massachusetts€discovery€rule.Ð l¼ Ðà  àà ` àThe€Massachusetts€discovery€rule€applies€to€tort€actionsÐ h Ðand€actions€under€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€93A.€€òòSeeóó€òòSzymanskióó€v.Ð Ä ÐòòBoston€Mutual€Life€Ins.€Co.óó,€778€N.E.2d€16,€20€(Mass.€€App.€Ct.Ð pÀ  Ð2002).€€The€rule€€Ð !l" ÐÓÓà8  àoperates€to€toll€a€limitations€period€until€a€prospectiveÐ È"$ Ðplaintiff€learns€or€should€have€learned€that€he€has€beenÐ ž#î% Ðinjured,€[and]€may€arise€in€three€circumstances:€where€aÐ t$Ä& Ðmisrepresentation€concerns€a€fact€that€was€"inherentlyÐ J%š ' Ðunknowable"€to€the€injured€party,€where€a€wrongdoerÐ  &p!( Ðbreached€some€duty€of€disclosure,€or€where€a€wrongdoerÐ ö&F") Ðconcealed€the€existence€of€a€cause€of€action€through€someÐ Ì'#* Ðaffirmative€act€done€with€the€intent€to€deceive.Т(ò#+Ð Ð  ÐÌÓÓòòPatsosóó€v.€òòFirst€Albany€Corp.óó,€741€N.E.2d€841,€846€(Mass.€2001)Ð N*ž%- Ð(citation€omitted).€€Loguidice€invokes€the€first€and€second€ofÐ ú+J'/ Ðthese€circumstances,€contending€that€(1)€the€wrong€visited€upon€herÐ ° Ðwas€inherently€unknowable€(because€of€the€complexity€of€the€productÐ \¬ Ðinvolved)€until€she€read€about€MetLife's€"scam"€in€the€newspaper,Ð X Ðand€(2)€defendants,€whom€Loguidice€contends€were€her€fiduciaries,Ð ´  Ðfailed€to€discharge€their€obligations€to€disclose€facts€that€wouldÐ ` ° Ðhave€put€her€on€notice€of€her€claims.€€In€pressing€the€latterÐ  \  Ðargument,€Loguidice€invokes€a€principle€of€Massachusetts€law€thatÐ ¸  Ðtreats€a€fiduciary's€failure€to€disclose€facts€giving€notice€of€aÐ d´  Ðclaim€as€a€fraudulent€concealment€sufficient€to€toll€the€running€ofÐ `  Ðthe€relevant€limitations€period€under€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€260,Ð ¼  Ððð€12€(1997)€(tolling€limitations€periods€where€a€"person€liable€toÐ h¸ Ða€personal€action€conceals€the€cause€of€such€action€from€theÐ d Ðknowledge€of€the€person€entitled€to€bring€it").€€Neither€assertionÐ À Ðpersuades€us.€Ð l¼ Ðà  àà ` àLoguidice's€argument€that€the€wrongs€she€suffered€wereÐ h Ðinherently€unknowable€until€she€read€the€newspaper€article€aboutÐ Ä Ðthe€class„action€settlement€is€undercut€by€our€unwillingness€toÐ pÀ  Ðhand€down€expansive€interpretations€of€state€law€at€the€request€ofÐ !l" Ðdiversity€plaintiffs.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòNew€Life€Brokerage€Servs.,€Inc.óóÐ È"$ Ðv.€òòCal„Surance€Assocs.,€Inc.óó,€___€F.3d€___,€No.€02„2348,€slip€op.Ð t$Ä& Ðat€8€(1st€Cir.€June€24,€2003).€€Loguidice€concedes€that€she€did€notÐ  &p!( Ðread€through€the€folder€Anastasia€left€with€her€when€he€deliveredÐ Ì'#* Ðher€"plan"€until€after€instituting€this€litigation.€€Had€she€lookedÐ x)È$, Ðat€the€materials€in€the€folder€earlier,€a€reasonable€fact€finderÐ $+t&. Ðwould€have€to€conclude,€she€would€have€learned€that€there€wasÐ ° Ðnothing€in€the€folder€that€could€have€constituted€part€of€theÐ \¬ Ðretirement€plan€she€thought€that€she€had€purchased€other€than€theÐ X Ðlife€insurance€policy,€which€was€distinctively€so€labeled.€€TheÐ ´  ÐMassachusetts€courts€require€plaintiffs€seeking€to€invoke€theÐ ` ° Ðdiscovery€rule€to€read€the€monthly€statements€sent€by€theirÐ  \  Ðsecurities€broker,€òòseeóó€òòPatsosóó,€741€N.E.2d€at€846„47,€and€seeminglyÐ ¸  Ðassume€that€they€also€must€read€their€insurance€policies,€anyÐ d´  Ðillustrations€that€accompany€the€policies,€and€their€annualÐ `  Ðstatements,€òòseeóó€òòSzymanskióó,€778€N.E.2d€at€21„25.€€We€therefore€haveÐ ¼  Ðno€reason€to€expect€that€the€Massachusetts€courts€would€forgiveÐ h¸ ÐLoguidice's€failure€to€read€through€her€folder.€€Because€such€aÐ d Ðread„through€would€have€put€Loguidice€on€inquiry€notice€of€herÐ À Ðclaims,€the€discovery€rule€does€not€save€those€claims.€€òòSeeóó€òòPatsosóó,Ð l¼ Ð741€N.E.2d€at€846„47.Ð h Ðà  àà ` àLoguidice's€fraudulent€concealment€argument€falters€onÐ Ä Ðprocedural€grounds.€€The€argument€did€not€surface€in€connectionÐ pÀ  Ðwith€either€of€her€summary€judgment€submissions.€€Rather,€it€wasÐ !l" Ðraised€for€the€first€time€in€a€motion€asking€the€district€court€toÐ È"$ Ðreconsider€its€entry€of€judgment€on€her€fraud€and€deceit,€breach€ofÐ t$Ä& Ðfiduciary€duty,€and€Mass.€Gen.€Laws€Ann.€ch.€93A€claims.€€This€wasÐ  &p!( Ðtoo€late.€€òòSeeóó€òòDiMarco„Zappaóó€v.€òòCabanillasóó,€238€F.3d€25,€33€(1stÐ Ì'#* ÐCir.€2001)€(issues€first€raised€on€a€motion€for€reconsideration€areÐ x)È$, Ðforfeit);€òòCMM€Cable€Rep,€Inc.óóv.€òòOcean€Coast€Properties,€Inc.óó,€97Ð $+t&. ÐF.3d€1504,€1525„27€(1st€Cir.€1996)€(same).׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð ° Ðà@üü(ìàIII.ˆÐ \¬ Ðà  àà ` àIf€the€facts€alleged€are€true,€the€defendants'€salesÐ X Ðtactics€were€shameful.€€But€Loguidice€failed€to€press€any€viableÐ ´  Ðclaims€she€might€have€had€as€a€result€of€these€tactics€until€afterÐ ` ° Ðthe€relevant€statute(s)€of€limitations€had€run.€€Because€theÐ  \  Ðdiscovery€rule€does€not€save€Loguidice's€claims,€we€affirm€theÐ ¸  Ðjudgment€that€was€entered€for€defendants.Ð d´  Ðà  àà ` àòòò òAffirmed.óóó 󀀀Р`  Ðà  àà ` à