Williams v. Geico Government Employees Insurance
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
2Per curiam
AND NOW, this 18th day of November, 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:
Whether, under the MVFRL and our decision in Burstein v. Prudential Property & Cas. Ins. Co., 570 Pa. 177, 809 A.2d 204 (2002), the “regular-use” exclusion to underinsured motorist coverage in an automobile insurance policy is valid where the insured is a police officer, who has sustained bodily injury in the course of performing his duties while driving a police vehicle, for which vehicle he could not have obtained underinsured motorist coverage.
3Cases cited1 opinion
- Burstein v. Prudential Property & Casualty InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
4Cited by6 opinions
- Williams v. Geico Government Employees InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
- Dixon v. GEICOSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
- Commonwealth v. ReedSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Dixon v. GEICOSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
- Dixon v. GEICOSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.