Legal Opinion

Miller v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 31, 1985No. 1808PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OLSZEWSKI, Judge:

At issue is a claim for work loss benefits under the Pennsylvania No-Fault Motor Vehicle Insurance Act, 40 P.S. Sec. 1009.101 et seq. Ruling that the claim was time-barred, the lower court granted summary judgment in favor of Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Company. This appeal followed.

Section 106(c)(1) requires commencement of suit within two years of the date the victim “suffers the loss and either knows or, in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known, that the loss was caused by the accident.” 40 P.S. Sec. 1009.106(c)(1). Our Supreme Court, in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Motley v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Kamperis v. Nationwide InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  3. Platts v. Government Employees InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Graf v. State Farm InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  2. Needleman v. Liberty Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  3. Anthony v. Paxton National Insurance, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Warren County1987
  4. Brenner v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  5. Driscoll v. Travelers InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

2 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