Legal Opinion

Hobbs v. Ryce

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 15, 2001PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BECK, J.:

¶ 1 We decide, inter alia, whether a parent’s limited tort election applies to a minor residing with his parents, and whether the trial court properly applied sections 1711(a) and 1722 of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (MVFRL) to reduce a verdict for medical expenses to zero.

¶ 2 This action involved a motor vehicle accident. Plaintiff Robert Hobbs, who at the time of the accident was sixteen years old and living with his parents, sued for personal injuries. Hobbs was a passenger sitting in the rear of a vehicle driven by defendant Kevin Ryce. Ryce…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Coker v. SM Flickinger Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  2. Kiser v. SchulteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  3. Washington v. BaxterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  4. Neison v. HinesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  5. Washington v. BaxterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Gorski v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Criswell v. KingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  3. Stapas, J. v. Giant Eagle, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  4. Pentarek v. ChristySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  5. Ganley, J. v. Robertson, P.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020

7 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