Hackenberg v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
FLAHERTY, Justice.
These consolidated appeals present the question of whether the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (hereinafter, MVFRL), 75 Pa.C.S. § 1701 et seq.,1 or the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 77 Pa.C.S. § 481(a), prevails where an employee is injured in a work-related automobile accident and seeks to recover both workers’ compensation benefits and uninsured motorist benefits from his employer. In general, the Workmen’s Compensation Act provides that recovery of workers’ compensation benefits is the sole and exclusive remedy which an employee has against…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lewis v. School Dist. of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Modesta v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Commonwealth v. WolfSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
3Cited by51 opinions
- Lewis v. Erie Insurance ExchangeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Ducaji v. DennisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Warner v. Continental/CNA Insurance CompaniesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinois v. Joseph N. DibartoloCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
- Borgia v. Prudential Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.