As such, the Defendant carrier’s Motion for Summary Judgment was granted and the Plaintiff’s cross Motion for Summary Judgment was denied.
According to the Opinion, the Plaintiff sought to preclude the coverage forms at issue from consideration by the court. However, the Plaintiff also conceded that, if the UM/UIM coverage forms were admissible, then the carrier would indeed be entitled to summary judgment. The court denied the Motion to Preclude the Documents from Consideration.
The court also ruled that, even if the election forms were excluded, the application for insurance itself constituted sufficient evidence for the court to find that the Plaintiff intended to purchase lower UM/UIM coverage limits.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK. The Court's companion Order can be viewed HERE.
The Court's Opinion on the Plaintiff's motion to preclude the admission of copies of the pertinent documents can be viewed HERE.
Source: “Digest of Recent Opinions.” Pennsylvania Law Weekly (Aug. 17, 2021).
Source: “Digest of Recent Opinions.” Pennsylvania Law Weekly (Aug. 17, 2021).
Source of image: Photo by Scott Graham on Unsplash.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.