In Moritz v. Horace Mann Property & Casualty Ins. Co., C.P. Lackawanna County, Number 13 CV 544 (11/10/2014), the Court, in a case of first impression, detailed how a UM/UIM carrier will be identified to a the Jury when the carrier is the only Defendant and what...
Articles/E-Alerts
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In the Non-Precedential Memorandum Opinion Bricker v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Memorandum Decision, No. 102 MDA 2014 (Pa.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 statutory...
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 use the host...
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 coverage. Both of...
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 Action No. 12-1547 (W.D....