Anyone aware of any other trial court opinions on post-Koken issues?

Following up on the most recent post below in which it is noted that, in the absence of any appellate decisions to date, the trial courts of Pennsylvania will have to rely upon each other for guidance in handling the novel post-Koken issues, I am wondering if anyone has had any trial court opinions issued in a post-Koken UIM/UM case.

If so, I would ask if you could please post a comment (click on the word "comment" below), and note the case name, court of common pleas and judge involved, docket number, attorneys involved, basic facts of the case, a description of the court's decision and, if available, any citation.

Also, if you are in possession of a post-Koken decisions that have not been published, I would appreciate it if you would please send me a copy and I will see if there is a way I can post it on this blog.

As noted in the articles cited in the previous post, the only way this law area of law is going to be developed in a consistent fashion so as to enable counsel to approach, handle and offer legal advice on these issues with any certainty is if we get a sense as to how the trial courts are ruling through a review of their opinions. Thanks to anyone offering information in this regard.