Legal Opinion

Ector v. Motorists Insurance Companies

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 6, 1990No. 1746PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BECK, Judge:

The issue is whether an uninsured pedestrian injured by an insured stolen vehicle is entitled to seek recovery of non-economic damages from the insurer of the motor vehicle or the Assigned Claims Plan. We hold that the insurer of the motor vehicle, appellant Motorists Insurance Companies (“Motorists”), is the source of recovery for the uninsured pedestrian seeking non-economic damages. In so holding, we affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant-Motorists’ summary judgment motion, its grant of appellee-Ector’s summary judgment motion and its grant of appelleeThe Travelers’…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Tubner v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  3. Sweener v. First Baptist Church of EmporiumSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Bobb v. KraybillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  5. Donegal Mutual Insurance v. LongSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Jeffrey v. Erie Insurance ExchangeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  2. Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. CummingsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  3. DUBLIN BY DUBLIN v. ShusterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  4. Frazier v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  5. United Services Automobile Ass'n v. ShearsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997

7 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