Legal Opinion
Dominick v. Statesman Insurance
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided April 2, 1997No. 293PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JOHNSON, Judge.
In this appeal, we are asked to determine whether the rotting of floor joists in a residential home that resulted in the downward movement of the home’s first floor and separation of that floor from the walls constitutes a “collapse” under the terms of a homeowners insurance policy and Pennsylvania law. Because we find that the damage to the home does not equal a collapse, we reverse.
In January of 1995, Paul and Barbara Dominick (the Dominicks) noticed that the first floor of their home had moved approximately one inch downward and that the floor had separated from the interior…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Commonwealth v. DuggerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Butterfield v. GiuntoliSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Rader v. Pennsylvania Turnpike CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
- Lilley v. Johns-Manville Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Hoffman v. Brandywine HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- 401 Fourth Street, Inc. v. Investors Insurance GroupSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Meritcare Incorporated Meritcare Ventures, Inc. Quinlan Medical, Inc. v. St. Paul Mercury Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
- D'ERRICO v. DeFazioSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Commonwealth v. BuschSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Weiner v. Selective Way InsuranceSuperior Court of Delaware · 2002
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.