Alston v. St. Paul Insurance Companies
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ZAPPALA, Justice.
The issue presented in this appeal is whether an employee who sustains an injury covered by the Pennsylvania Workmen’s Compensation Act, 77 P.S. § 1 et seq., may assert a separate tort action for injuries allegedly arising out of malicious and fraudulent conduct and abuse of the legal process to terminate workmen’s compensation benefits by agents of the employer’s insurance carrier. Based upon our decision in Kuney v. PMA Insurance Company, 525 Pa. 171, 578 A.2d 1285 (1990), we conclude that the exclusivity provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act prohibit a tort…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kuney v. PMA InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- American Casualty Co. v. KLIGERMANSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
- Alston v. St. Paul Ins. CompaniesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Rosipal v. Montgomery WardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Rosipal v. WardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Santiago v. Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Tooey v. AK Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- Ducaji v. DennisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- J.L. Nagle. v. TrueBlue, Inc., Labor Ready, Inc. and Labor Ready Northeast, Inc. and Rye Twp.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
- Ducjai v. DennisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.