Sturtz v. Ludy

COFFROTH, P.J.,

— This trespass case is here on preliminary objections to *290the complaint challenging the sufficiency of its averments under the no-fault statute in several respects, dealt with under separate headings, as follows:

Loss of Consortium

Plaintiff husband, who [incurred medical bills in excess of $6,500 and thereby] has sufficiently pleaded a cause of action for noneconopiic harm under séction 301(a)(5)(B) of the Pennsylvania No-fault Motor Vehicle Insurance Act of July 19, 1974, P.L. 489, 40 P.S. §1009.301, also alleges a claim for loss of his wife’s consortium in paragraph 21 of the…