Legal Opinion

Tonkovic v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 2, 1987PublishedCited by 130 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

PAPADAKOS, Justice.

The issue presented by this appeal is whether Appellant, John Tonkovic, III, is bound by an exclusionary clause in an insurance contract, where such clause was unilaterally inserted by Appellee, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, subsequent to Appellant's application and premium payment being accepted by Appellee, through its agent, for disability insurance coverage without any exclusion; and where such exclusion was neither explained to, nor accepted by, the Appellant.

The present controversy arose under the following facts: In July of 1979,…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Standard Venetian Blind Co. v. American Empire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Martin v. Johns-Manville Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  3. Collister v. Nationwide Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  4. Thompson v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  5. Allen v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1965

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

3Cited by130 opinions

  1. Madison Construction Co. v. Harleysville Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  2. Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. Stevens & Ricci IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2016
  3. Wilkie v. Auto-Owners InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Reliance Insurance v. MoessnerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
  5. The Medical Protective Company v. William WatkinsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999

125 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