Legal Opinion
Equibank v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided May 6, 1993No. 343, 344, 345, 346, 356 and 626PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HESTER, Judge.
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. appeals from summary judgment entered against it in these consolidated declaratory judgment actions. The issue presented is whether an anti-stacking clause that appears in both policies is clear and unambiguous. As we conclude that the anti-stacking provision is clear, we reverse the determination of the trial court and grant appellant’s motion for summary judgment.
The relevant facts are as follows. Four of these appeals relate to trial court docket number G.D. 88-9064, which was instituted by Russell Barkley, Jr. State Farm issued two…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Standard Venetian Blind Co. v. American Empire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Harleysville Mutual Casualty Co. v. BlumlingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- Bishop v. WashingtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Antanovich v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Koval v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Treesdale, Inc. Pittsburgh Metals Purifying CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- UTI Corp. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1995
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Universal Underwriters InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Travelers Home & Marine Insurance Co. v. StahleyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2017
- Giant Eagle, Inc. v. Federal InsuranceDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1995
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.