In a matter of first impression, a three-judge Superior Court panel has ruled that a particular limit on the amount of underinsured motorist coverage an insured may recover from multiple auto policies does not violate Pennsylvania’s Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law.

And the Wednesday decision is a win for insurance companies, after the judges rejected a challenge to an auto insurer’s “limit of protection” clause. The clause capped the plaintiff’s total available UIM coverage at the highest limit of a single one of her policies, rather than capping her coverage at the combined limit of the two policies she held.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]