Legal Opinion

Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Insurance Commissioner

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 10, 1982No. Appeal, No. 1184 C.D. 1980PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Craig,

We are required to decide if the. Insurance Commissioner exceeded his statutory authority in disapproving the use of sex as a classification basis for automobile insurance rate differentials, under the Casualty and Surety Rate Regulatory Act of 1947 (Rate Act), Act of June 11, 1947, P.L. 538, 40 P.S. §§1181-1199.1

After the Insurance Department had earlier approved a rate classification plan filed on behalf of Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, Philip V. Mattes, the intervening appellee here, filed a complaint under Section 5(b) of the Rate Act, 40 P.S. § 1185(b),…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Conway v. DanaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  2. Commonwealth v. ButlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  3. Henderson v. HendersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  4. DiFlorido v. DiFloridoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  5. Commonwealth v. Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Ass'nCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1975

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Insurance Commissioner of CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  2. Bartholomew Ex Rel. Bartholomew v. FosterCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Dillon v. HOMEOWNER'S SELECT, AFFINITY INS. SERVICES, INC.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  4. Fischer v. Department of Public WelfareCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  5. Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. BrowneCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

1 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