Legal Opinion

August v. Stasak

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 5, 1981No. 499PublishedCited by 61 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

LARSEN, Justice.

This case involves an insurance policy provision which requires the insured to promptly notify the insurance company in the event of an accident or loss.1 At one time such provisions were strictly enforced in our Commonwealth, and late notice would release the insurance company from its contractual duties, even where the late notice did not harm the insurance company in any way. See Meierdierck v. *553Miller, 394 Pa. 484, 147 A.2d 406 (1959). However, we rejected the strict enforcement approach in Brakeman v. Potomac Insurance Co., 472 Pa. 66, 371 A.2d 193 (1977), holding…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Linkletter v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  2. Brakeman v. Potomac Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Collister v. Nationwide Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  4. Kuchinic v. McCrorySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  5. Gibson v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980

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

3Cited by61 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. CabezaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Blackwell v. Com. State Ethics Com'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  3. Dercoli v. Pennsylvania National Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  4. Carter v. United States Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  5. Fiore v. WhiteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000

56 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