Legal Opinion

Cooke v. Travelers Insurance

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 13, 1986No. 468PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WIEAND, Judge:

The sole issue in this appeal is whether the trial court erred when it held as a matter of law that no-fault work loss benefits could not be recovered by a claimant who sustained injuries when he fell while descending from a tank truck which he had mounted for the purpose of priming a pump thereon. We conclude that the court’s ruling must be reversed.

An action in assumpsit was instituted by Paul C. Cooke, Jr., the appellant, for the purpose of recovering work loss benefits from Fireman’s Insurance Company of Newark (Fireman’s), the appellee, 1 which had written the insurance on…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Timbrook v. Foremost InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  2. Dull v. Employers Mutual Casualty Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  3. Lattanze v. SilverstriniSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. East Texas Motor Freight, Diamond Division v. LloydSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  5. Beary v. Pennsylvania Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Lilley v. Johns-Manville Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  2. Hiscott and Robinson v. KingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  3. Boyce v. Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  4. Dible v. VagleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  5. Thompson v. Maryland & Pennsylvania Railroad Preservation SocietySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

12 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