Legal Opinion

Antanovich v. Allstate Insurance

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 10, 1984No. 450PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SPAETH, Judge:

This case arises on two appeals, which we ordered consolidated because they both present the question whether the Pennsylvania No-fault Motor Vehicle Insurance Act, Act of July 19, 1974, P.L. 489, No. 176, No. 40 P.S. 1009.101 et seq., requires that the basic loss benefits provided by Section 202 of the Act, 40 P.S. § 1009.202, are to be multiplied by the number of vehicles as to which security has been provided under an insurance policy entitling the victim to benefits. Stated differently, we are to decide whether basic loss benefits may be “stacked.” The Courts of Common Pleas…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Collister v. Nationwide Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  2. Singer v. SheppardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  3. Feingold v. Bell of PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  4. Allstate Insurance v. HeffnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  5. Harleysville Mutual Casualty Co. v. BlumlingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968

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

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. Bishop v. WashingtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  2. Antanovich v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  3. Koval v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Votedian v. General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  5. Commonwealth v. LeibSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991

40 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