Legal Opinion

Soles v. Pennsylvania National Mutual Insurance

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 5, 1988No. 246PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DEL SOLE, Judge:

This appeal follows the trial court’s ruling on cross motions for Summary Judgment. Summary Judgment in favor of Appellee, Plaintiff in the underlying action, was granted; while a like motion filed by the Appellant, defendant, was denied.

*607A unique factual circumstance provides the basis for the instant litigation. On January 17, 1985, Appellee was traveling as a passenger in a Renault Alliance when that vehicle was involved in an accident. Appellee suffered injuries and received benefits from Allstate Insurance Company, which had issued Appellee a policy of insurance covering a…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Antanovich v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  2. Curry v. Estate of ThompsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. Borysowski v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Wright v. National Grange Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Kosor v. Harleysville Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  2. Ochs v. Erie Insurance ExchangeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  3. Murray v. Erie Insurance Exchange, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Erie County1990
  4. Soles v. Pennsylvania National Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  5. Stratton v. Allstate Insurance, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County1990

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

Powered by the Exa API