Legal Opinion
Winslow-Quattlebaum v. Maryland Insurance Group
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided June 20, 2000No. 39 E.D. Appeal Dkt. 1999PublishedCited by 83 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
NIGRO, Justice.
The sole issue before this Court is whether an insured’s rejection of underinsured motorist benefits must appear alone on a page in the insurance application to be valid pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S. § 1731 (c.l). For the reasons stated below, we reverse.
' On July 25, 1994, Deborah Winslow-Quattlebaum (Winslow-Quattlebaum) purchased an automobile insurance policy through the Assigned Risk Plan of Pennsylvania (Plan) which assigned the policy to Maryland Casualty Company (Maryland). 1 Thereafter, Winslow-Quattlebaum was injured in an automobile accident attributable to the other…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Commonwealth v. LassiterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Rohrbaugh v. Pennsylvania PUCSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
- American Airlines, Inc. v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- State College Manor Ltd. v. Commonwealth, Department of Public WelfareCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Winslow-Quattlebaum v. Maryland Casualty Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
3Cited by83 opinions
- Brown v. Progressive InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
- Craley v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Rendell v. Pennsylvania State Ethics CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Lewis v. Erie Insurance ExchangeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Banfield, Aplts. v. Secretary of the ComSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
78 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.