No Coverage for Independent Rideshare Driver

An exclusion in a State Farm Insurance policy barring coverage for accidents occurring while giving rides in exchange for money is not voided by the Pennsylvania Ridesharing Act because the driver was an independent contractor and not an employee of a rideshare operator. See a detailed summary of the case of Harley v. Ribers' Club Cooperative

Pennsylvania Court Provides Gateway for Insureds to Keep Lawsuits in State Court

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

Lawful Possession Not Found for Vehicle Passenger

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

No Property Damage for Negligent or Intentional Omissions in Home Sales

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.

Getting to Know Us

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.

Tincher 2!

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.