The Eastern District of Pennsylvania recently issued a decision that may help insureds interested in having their cases heard in state court rather than allowing those cases to be removed to Federal Court. In the case, a plaintiff defeated diversity by naming both the insurer and the claims adjuster as defendants. See a detailed summary of the case and the decision in Dominique Ellis v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company
As some of our members may be aware, the PADC and PTLA have begun a series of joint meetings with the Philadelphia judiciary. The purpose of these meetings is to provide input to and solicit feedback from the judiciary on various topics of interest both to the bench and the bar.
Pennsylvania's Superior Court holds that an insured riding as a passenger in a non-owned car did not have "possession" of the car for liabilty coverage purposes where she temporarily grabbed the car's steering wheel from the driver causing the car to colide with anoither vehicle. See a detailed summary of the case of State Farm Mutual Autonobile Insurance Company v. Dooner
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania recently held that an insurer did not act in bad faith or breach of contract when it refused to defend and indemnify an insured in an underlying action in which the insured was accused of concealing water damage, as there was no "property damage" as required by the insurance policy to trigger the insurer's duty to defend.
The Philadelphia Association of Defense Counsel (PADC) is an active participant in the Philadelphia community as our members strive to demonstrate their commitment to give back to the community in which they practice law.
On February 16, 2018, a unanimous 3-judge panel of the Pennsylvania Superior Court in Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., ___ A.3d ___, No. 1285 EDA 2016 (Pa. Super. Feb. 16, 2018) (“Tincher II”), held, following the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s prior landmark ruling in the same case, Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 104 A.3d 328 (Pa. 2014) (“Tincher I”), that in a strict product liability case it is “fundamental error” to use an “Azzarello” jury charge employing the now-overruled “any element” defect test and informing the jury that the defendant manufacturer was the “guarantor” of product safety.
A Pennsylvania Superior Court panel recently held in Roverano v. John Crane, Inc., that Pennsylvania's Fair Share Act apploes to the allocation of liability in all strict liabilty cases, including asbestos actions.
In Bielec v. Verizon Pennsylvania, a Philadelphia County judge held a commercial auto UIM rejection form was void because it was executed improperly by Verizon.
Pennsylvania's Supreme Court in a unanimous opinion dated September 28, 2017, in a case of first impression clarified the elements of an insurance bad faith action under Pennsylvania's bad faith statute found at 42 Pa.C.S. Section 8371.
The Philadelphia Association of Defense Counsel’s website includes a page entitled “Our History”.