Deviations From Statutory Requirements Continue To Render The UM/UIM Rejection Forms Void
In the Non-Precedential Memorandum Opinion Bricker v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Memorandum Decision, No. 102 MDA 2014 (Pa. Super. August 22, 2014), the Pennsylvania Superior Court again reiterated the rule that deviations from...
Trial Court holds that Limited Tort Passenger Is Full Tort While In Full Tort Vehicle
Edgington v. Abersold, C.P. Lawrence County, No. 10570 of 2012, C.A. (C.C.P. September 24, 2014) Piccione, J. In Edgington v. Abersold, a Lawrence County Common Pleas Court found that a passenger injured in a motor vehicle accident was permitted to...
Can a Third Party “Settlement” Preclude UIM Benefits
Recently, both the Federal Court and the Pennsylvania Superior Court decided the issue of whether a recommendation of settlement in a non-binding arbitration or an arbitration award within the underlying coverage limits precludes a claim for UIM...
What’s “Meaningful Investigation” In A UIM Claim
The Federal District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania has issued a decision providing insurers with further guidance on what constitutes a meaningful investigation in the context of a UIM claim. In Mineo v. GEICO, W.D. Pa., Civil...
Three Little Words Make All The Difference In UIM “Household Exclusion” Case
In its most recent interpretation of a “household exclusion” provision in a UIM policy the Pennsylvania Superior Court, in a 2-1 decision, struck down the exclusion and awarded the claimant UIM benefits based upon the unique, and conflicting,...
Supreme Court Clarifies Forum Non Conveniens
A common issue facing defendants is the prospect of being forced to try a case in a venue far from where the incident happened and where witnesses and evidence are located. Usually, the forum was only chosen by Plaintiff for purposes of...
Regular Use Exclusion in UM Claim Upheld, Again
On June 30, 2013 the Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Erie Insurance Group based on Erie’s regular use exclusion. At the time of the accident, Mr. Catania was operating a delivery...
Eastern District Applies Sackett II and Seiple and Holds That After-Acquired Vehicle Clause Does Not Constitute Purchase of New Coverage to Trigger Need for New Stacking Waiver Forms
Recently in Powell v. Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company, 13-5721 (E.D. July 21, 2014), the Eastern District of Pennsylvania limited the Plaintiff’s recovery of uninsured motorist benefits, rejecting her argument that a vehicle was...
Supreme Court Affirms Superior Court in Lipsky v. State Farm
An evenly divided Supreme Court has affirmed the Superior Court’s holding that an emotional or mental distress claim by a physically uninjured bystander, who witnessed a family member get hit and killed by a car, is found to be its own “bodily...
The Supreme Court Holds That The Tortfeasor Credit Under a UIM Policy Includes Damages Recovered From All Tortfeasors and Not Just Auto Insurance Policies
Recently, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in AAA Mid-Atlantic Insurance Company v. Ryan, No. 12 MAP 2013 (Pa. 2014) considered whether, under an insurance policy for underinsured motorist (“UIM”) coverage, the amount of an insured’s recovery may be...
The Pennsylvania Superior Court re-visits the stacking waiver issues from Sackett v. Nationwide.
On June 6, 2014, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania issued an new opinion on the requirement of waivers under Sec. 1738 of the MVFRL for stacked UM/UIM (Uninsured/Underinsured motorist coverage) in Bumbarger v. Peerless Indemnity Insurance Company,...
Has Medicaid Lost Its Right To Assert A Statutory Lien? It Has For The Time Being!
I. INTRODUCTION On March 25, 2009, United States District Judge, Joy Flowers Conti, authored a 97 page Memorandum Opinion addressing the validity of liens placed by the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare on settlement proceeds obtained from...