Legal Opinion

Floczak v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 24, 1981No. 412PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SPAETH, Judge:

The issue presented in this case is whether a claim for basic work loss benefits under the Pennsylvania No-Fault Insurance Act 1 may be commenced by petition and rule. We hold that it may not be but that it must be commenced by praecipe for writ of summons or a complaint, as provided by Pa.R.C.P. 1007.

Appellee alleges that on December 18, 1976, she was hurt in an automobile accident, and as a result, incurred $2,326.75 in medical expenses and lost $8,082.90 in wages. She sought recovery under an insurance policy issued by appellant to the driver of the automobile in which she…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hartmann v. PetersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  2. Pennsylvania Crime Commission PetitionsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  3. Commonwealth v. DERRY TOWNSHIPCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  4. Commonwealth v. LivingoodCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1976

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Aivazoglou v. Drever FurnacesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  2. Haegele v. Pennsylvania General InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. Jones v. State Automobile InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  4. JOHNSON BY JOHNSON v. TravelersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  5. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Nixon v. NixonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

15 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