Rago v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
BECK, Judge:
We are today presented with an issue of first impression: to what extent must a parent rely on the financial support and uncompensated services provided by a child in order to be a “dependent” for purposes of receiving survivor’s benefits under the Pennsylvania No-fault Motor Vehicle Insurance Act (No-fault Act). 1
Consistent with the remedial nature of the No-fault Act, we hold that a claimant must demonstrate on the record an actual dependency but need not show such complete reliance that any finding of independence would negate the finding of dependency. The test is whether the…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Hayes v. Erie Insurance ExchangeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Freeze v. Donegal Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- Freeze v. Donegal Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Antanovich v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Antanovich v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Gallagher v. Harleysville Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Klopp v. Keystone Insurance CompaniesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Hill v. Port Authority Transit SystemCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Patterson v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Forman v. State Farm Insurance, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1988
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.