Myers v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
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
- Singer v. SheppardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Antanovich v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Antanovich v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Busy Beaver Building Centers, Inc. v. TuecheSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Klebanoff v. McMonagleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Riley v. Travelers InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Diggs v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1988
- Diggs v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1988
- Pistorius v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Pistorius v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985