Legal Opinion

Dixon v. GEICO

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 29, 2010No. 3127 EDA 2009PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

KELLY, J.:

¶ 1 Appellant, Lamont Dixon, appeals from the order granting summary judgment in favor of Appellee, GEICO, on his claim for underinsured motorist (UIM) benefits. The trial court concluded that the facts were not in dispute, and the issue of coverage could be decided as a matter of law. We vacate and remand.

¶ 2 Appellant worked in Philadelphia for the United States Postal Service (USPS) at a vehicle repair and maintenance facility as a garage man. ([Appellant’s] Answer to [Appellee’s] Motion for Summary Judgment, Exh. F, G). His duties were varied, including washing…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Burstein v. Prudential Property & Casualty InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Marks v. Nationwide Insurance Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  3. Johnson v. HarrisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  4. Ario v. Reliance InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  5. Nordi v. Keystone Health Plan West Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. ReedSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  2. Commonwealth v. SlocumSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  3. Empire Trucking Co. v. Reading Anthracite Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  4. Eckman v. Erie Insurance ExchangeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  5. Fiedler, E. v. Spencer, P.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020

11 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