In this decision, the Superior Court affirmed the entry of summary judgment in favor of the Plaintiff in a declaratory judgment action on stacking issues.
The court found that a family that initially chose not to stack insurance coverage for the cars they owned could still recover stacked insurance benefits after they added a new car to the policy several years after the purchase of the policy where the insurance carrier failed to obtain a waiver from the insured opting out of stacked coverage.
The court ruled that the addition of a new car under the circumstances presented in this matter constituted a new purchase of uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage that required the carrier to secure the waiver. The court found that no “after-acquired-vehicle clause” applied that would have removed the requirement for a new waiver.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this Majority Opinion by Judge Kate Ford Elliott may
click this LINK.
Judge Strassburger's Concurring Opinion can be viewed HERE.
The Dissenting Opinion by Judge Stabile may be viewed at this LINK.
Judge Strassburger's Concurring Opinion can be viewed HERE.
The Dissenting Opinion by Judge Stabile may be viewed at this LINK.
Source: Article: “Panel Opens Door to Stacked
Coverage and Waiver Isn’t Secured,” By:
Max Mitchell, Pennsylvania Law
Weekly (April 18, 2017).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.