Legal Opinion

Myers v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 20, 1985No. 692PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WIEAND, Judge:

The issue in this appeal is whether a motorized pedalcy-cle, popularly known as a “moped”, is a motorcycle for purposes of determining coverage under the Pennsylvania No-fault Motor Vehicle Insurance Act.1 We hold that a motorized pedalcycle, which must be licensed under the Motor Vehicle Code, is a motorcycle. Therefore, an operator of a moped is not entitled to recover benefits under the No-fault Act.

While operating a 1979 Sachs Moped, a motorized pedal-cycle, in the Borough of Greenville, Mercer County, on July 28, 1981, Paul Henry Myers was struck and seriously injured by an…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Singer v. SheppardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. Antanovich v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  3. Antanovich v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  4. Busy Beaver Building Centers, Inc. v. TuecheSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. Klebanoff v. McMonagleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Riley v. Travelers InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Diggs v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1988
  3. Diggs v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1988
  4. Pistorius v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  5. Pistorius v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API