Auto

Despite Error, Insurer Escapes Liability for UM/UIM Coverage

In Beach v. The Navigators Ins. Co., No. 1550 MDA 2019 (Pa. Super. Ct. Sept. 11, 2020), the plaintiffs sought UIM coverage under an automobile insurance policy issued to their employer. The dispute centered on the applicable limits of the UIM policy. The question as to the applicable UIM limit arose out of an error the insurer made when renewing the policy at issue. Beaches’ employer sought to...Read More

Keep on Stacking . . . PA Court Declines Insurer’s Request to Deny UIM Benefits (PA)

In Donegal Mutual Insurance Company v. Kevin Krautsack, et al, the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County held that “the household vehicle exclusion violates the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (“MVFRL”); therefore, these exclusions are unenforceable as a matter of law.” The case stems from an accident in which Kevin Krautsack was injured while riding his mother’s motorcycle....Read More

Importance of “Backing Up” Claims in MVA Case (PA)

In Ruffin v. Desh United Corporation et al. plaintiff learned a lesson fit for an evidence course lecture after he appealed the trial court’s decision in his personal injury case. According to plaintiff, he was injured while crossing the street when defendant driver backed into Ruffin with his car. The other defendants in the matter are defendant’s employers. After defendants appealed an...Read More

NYPD’s Hot Pursuit Immunity Has Limitations (NY)

In Fuchs v. City of New York (2020 NY Slip Op 04382), the NYPD was involved in a high-speed pursuit of a suspect. The plaintiff was driving down a one-way street when the suspect turned the wrong way and collided with plaintiff’s vehicle. Plaintiff sued the police department for her injuries and the City of New York claimed a qualified exemption under VTL § 1104 which provides an exemption for...Read More

Pennsylvania Appellate Court Requires New Stacking Waiver After Removal of a Vehicle From Policy (PA)

The Pennsylvania appellate court, in Franks v. State Farm, recently held that insurers must obtain a new stacking waiver after the insured removes a vehicle under the policy. The factual pattern in the instant matter was a matter of first impression for Pennsylvania Courts. Specifically, although it is clear that an addition of a vehicle to an existing multi-vehicle policy requires a new...Read More

PA Court Finds UIM Benefits Not Required Under PA Umbrella Policies

In Jones v Amica Mutual Insurance, the Court recently considered whether an insurer was required to pay UIM benefits under a Personal Umbrella Policy. In the underlying action, Jones filed suit for injuries she sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The adverse driver, Sean Murtha, was responsible for accident. Plaintiff received the $100,000 policy limit from Murtha’s insurer Allstate....Read More

What’s In A Name? The Wrong One Can End a Plaintiff’s Case (PA)

In Fick v. Barbon, plaintiff Terrence Fick (“Fick”) appealed the Superior Court’s decision to grant summary judgment in favor of defendant Barry Barbon (“Barbon”) following a car accident. At issue here is Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure (Pa,R.C.P.) 1033—which explains correcting the name of a defendant after litigation has commenced—and the application of an amendment to the rule. Fick...Read More

Third Circuit Agrees that Business Earnings Prior to an Accident Are Inconclusive (PA)

The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently affirmed a decision from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania and determined that an insurer’s issues with trial evidence and claims were invalid.  In Kirkpatrick v. GEICO Casualty Company, the insurance company moved for relief from a judgment or, alternatively, for a new trial which was...Read More

Insureds Get Two Strikes on EUO No-shows (NY)

Generally, the standard for an insurer to disclaim or withdraw coverage because of an insured’s noncooperation is a high one. Specifically, the Appellate Division First Department recently reiterated, “An insurer that seeks to disclaim coverage based on its insured’s alleged noncooperation is required to demonstrate that it acted diligently in seeking to bring about its insured’s...Read More

Trial Practice is Real (PA)

A recent case in Pennsylvania illustrates the importance of preserving objections at various points during trial.  The case Dempsey v. Josiassen et al. illustrates objections related to the jury verdict sheet and jury instructions once a case has concluded. In this personal injury case, plaintiff Dempsey was a passenger in a car driven by defendant Osbourne. As Osbourne was slowly driving down...Read More