Legal Opinion

Hackenberg v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 1, 1991No. 137 E.D. Appeal Docket 1989 and 10 W.D. Appeal Docket 1990PublishedCited by 51 opinions

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

  1. Lewis v. School Dist. of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  2. Modesta v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  3. Commonwealth v. WolfSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

3Cited by51 opinions

  1. Lewis v. Erie Insurance ExchangeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Ducaji v. DennisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  3. Warner v. Continental/CNA Insurance CompaniesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  4. Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinois v. Joseph N. DibartoloCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
  5. Borgia v. Prudential Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000

46 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