Pennsylvania's Highest Court Stacks the Odds Against Insurance Companies, Invalidating Household Exclusion in UM/UIM Policies >
January 29, 2019
In its most recent pronouncement regarding the UM/UIM stacking provisions of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania overturned decades of precedent by declaring the "household vehicle exclusion" found in most personal automobile policies to be void and unenforceable as a matter of law.
Rancosky v. Washington National Insurance Co.: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Finally Rules on Test for Insurance Bad Faith; Holds That Proof of an Insurer's Motive of Self-Interest or Ill Will Is Not Required
October 6, 2017
In Rancosky v. Washington Nat'l Ins. Co. the Pennsylvania Supreme Court at long last ruled squarely on what must be proven to establish bad faith under 42 Pa. C.S.A. §8371, Pennsylvania's "bad faith statute," and, in doing so, held that proof of a motive of self-interest or ill will on the part of the insurer is not required.
Westport Ins. Co. v. Mylonas: Pennsylvania Court Fashions New Test for Legal Malpractice Claims Under E&O Policies >
August 31, 2016
In Westport Insurance Company v. Mylonas, Judge Slomsky of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted summary judgment in favor of Westport in a declaratory judgment action, declaring that under an errors and omissions (E&O) policy, multiple related acts of negligence amount to a single claim under a legal malpractice policy.
In the Wake of Superstorm Sandy, Insurance Carriers are Well-Advised to Review New Jersey Insurance Bad Faith Law >
March 12, 2013
Superstorm Sandy's devastating landfall in October 2012 caused property damage and income loss in New Jersey that early estimates suggest will exceed $50 billion. Commercial and personal lines property insurers have been inundated with claims. As some of these claims progress, the term "bad faith" may be hurled by policyholder representatives - public adjusters and attorneys - who may have little familiarity with New Jersey law governing such assertions.