Legal Opinion · Dissent

Blazquez v. Pennsylvania Financial Responsibility Assigned Claims Plan

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 28, 2000Published

1DissentBeck, J.

¶ 11 dissent.

¶ 2 The issue in this case is whether the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) qualifies under the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (MVFRL) as a proper governmental authority to whom an accident victim may make a report in order to be eligible to seek recovery against the Pennsylvania Assigned Claims Plan (the Plan). I find PennDOT is a proper governmental authority.

¶ 3 The facts in this case are stated in the majority’s opinion.

*387¶ 4 The MVFRL reporting requirement is contained within the definition of “uninsured motor vehicles”:(3) An unidentified motor…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Gunter v. Constitution State Service Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. Owens v. the Travelers Ins. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API