Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hauck v. Ohio Casualty Group of Insurance

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 13, 1987No. 434Published

1DissentDel Sole, Judge

With the greatest respect to my colleagues, I find I must dissent from the Opinion of the Majority in this case.

I believe that the analysis in the previously filed Opinion by Judge Harry Montgomery is a correct analysis of the factual situation and I quote that herein at length.

“The instant appeal raises a question of first impression in the appellate courts of our Commonwealth concerning certain obligations of an insurer under the Pennsylvania No-fault Motor Vehicle Insurance Act, Act of July 19, 1974, P.L. 489, No. 176, 40 P.S. § 1009.101, et seq., repealed by the Act of February 12, 1984,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Allstate Insurance v. HeffnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  2. Heffner v. Allstate InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  3. Chorba v. Davlisa Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Habecker v. Nationwide InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  5. DeSantis v. SwigartSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API