Article by Kathleen P. Dapper, Esq.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has granted the petition for allowance of appeal in Rush v. Erie Insurance Exchange. No. 37 MAL 2022 (Pa. June 27, 2022).
In Rush, the Pennsylvania Superior Court held that the regular use exclusion in automobile insurance policies conflicts with the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law and is unenforceable. See Rush v. Erie Ins. Exch., 265 A.3d 794 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2021).
Specifically, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has granted the appeal on the following issue, as framed by Erie Insurance as the petitioner:
Whether the decision of the three-judge panel of the Superior Court is in direct conflict with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decisions in Burstein v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 809 A.2d 204 (Pa. 2002) and Williams v. GEICO Gov’t Emps. Ins. Co., 32 A.3d 1195 (Pa. 2011) and whether the Superior Court erred as a matter of law by finding that the “regular use exclusion” contained in Pennsylvania auto insurance policies violates the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, 75 Pa. C.S. § 1701, et. seq.