Legal Opinion
Ario v. Ingram Micro, Inc.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided February 23, 2009No. 19 MAP 2006, 20 MAP 2006, 21 MAP 2006, 22 MAP 2006PublishedCited by 62 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Justice TODD.
In this direct appeal from a single-judge Commonwealth Court order, we consider whether an insurer’s pre-liquidation payment for a covered loss to an insured constitutes a preference, and thus is recoverable by a liquidator of the insurer pursuant to 40 P.S. § 221.30(a). For the reasons stated below, we conclude a payment made by an insurer to an insured in the ordinary course of business does not constitute antecedent debt, and therefore, is not a preference under Section 221.30(a). Accordingly, we affirm the order of the Commonwealth Court, albeit upon different…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Bill Johnson's Restaurants, Inc. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Fine v. CheccioSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Ertel v. Patriot-News Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- Marks v. TasmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Buffalo Township v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by62 opinions
- M.J.M. v. M.L.G.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- In Re Fc IIISupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
- In Re: A.J.R.-H. and I.G.R.-H. Apl of KJR MotherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
- Siciliano, A. v. Mueller, A.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
- Braswell, D. v. Wollard, M.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.