Salazar v. Allstate Insurance
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
CAPPY, Justice.
The issue presented in this appeal is whether an insurer may be granted summary judgment, as a matter of law, in an action to recover uninsured motorist (UM) benefits brought by resident relatives of the named insured, where the insurance policy renewal forms supplied to the policy’s named insured failed to contain the notice required by section 1791.1 of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (MVFRL),1 75 Pa.C.S. § 1791.1.2 For the reasons which follow, we conclude *661that sections 1731,1791, and 1791.1 of the MVFRL, 75 Pa.C.S. §§ 1731, 1791, and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Marks v. TasmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Commonwealth v. TilghmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- Johnson v. Concord Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
- Gwinn v. KaneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Botsko v. Donegal Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by68 opinions
- Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. BuffettaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
- Rush v. Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
- Lewis v. Erie Insurance ExchangeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Donnelly v. BauerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Booze v. Allstate Insurance Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.