Wade Clark Mulcahy LLP

<p style="text-align: justify;">In a recent case from the Eastern District of PA, <em><a href="https://www.wcmlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Meyers-v.-Travelers-Ins.-Co..pdf">Meyers v. Travelers Ins. Co.</a> </em>the court granted the defendant insurance company’s motion for summary judgment consistent with the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and focused on a secondary policy’s waiver of inter-policy stacking.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The plaintiff in the case was in a car accident, in which she received the policy limit of the at fault driver. However, this did not cover the extent of her injuries.  She then recovered from her own primary policy, and attempted to “stack” UIM polices. The policy at issue in the case was the plaintiff’s mother’s policy in which she waived inter-policy stacking. The inter-policy stacking waiver provision is made by the holder in exchange for reduced insurance payments. The plaintiff attempted to argue that waiver against inter-policy stacking had significant public policy concerns and prevented her from being made whole. However, the court ruled in favor of the defendant, stating The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania “consistently ha[s] been reluctant to invalidate a contractual provision due to public policy concerns.” Williams v. GEICO Gov’t Emps. Ins. Co., 32 A.3d 1195, 1200 (Pa. 2011). As a result, amongst other arguments the court ruled in favor of the defendant insurance company’s motion for summary judgment.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Thus, this case continues the PA insurance law case where courts have upheld waiver of inter policy stacking provisions as a valid.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Thanks to Kevin Riley for his contribution to this article.  Should you have any questions, please contact <a href="mailto:tbracken@wcmlaw.com">Tom Bracken</a>.</p>