Legal Opinion

Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Co. v. Black

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 21, 2007No. 109 MAP 2005PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*225 OPINION

Justice BAER.

We granted review in this case to determine whether the Superior Court erred in concluding that a “setoff’ provision in an automobile insurance policy was unenforceable as against public policy. A setoff provision, generally, provides for the reduction of a claimant’s potential recovery under one part of an insurance policy, such as underinsured motorist coverage, by the amount the claimant recovered under another portion of the same insurance policy, such as bodily injury liability coverage. We conclude that the setoff provision at issue does not violate public policy.…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Buffalo Township v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Utica Mutual Insurance v. ContriscianeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. Paylor v. Hartford Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  4. Eichelman v. Nationwide InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  5. Burstein v. Prudential Property & Casualty InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Meyer v. Cuna Mutual Insurance SocietyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2011
  2. Generette v. Donegal Mutual Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  3. Williams v. Geico Government Employees InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  4. Nationwide Insurance v. SchneiderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  5. Heller v. Pennsylvania League of Cities & MunicipalitiesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011

26 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