You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Erie Insurance Exchange v. Bristol

Citations: 639 Pa. 188; 160 A.3d 123Docket: No. 124 MAP 2016

Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania; May 24, 2017; Pennsylvania; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

This case involves a dispute over the procedural requirements for claimants seeking uninsured or underinsured motorist benefits from an insurance company. The Superior Court's decision in *Hopkins v. Erie Insurance Co.* is under scrutiny for potentially establishing a new procedural obligation requiring claimants to file a Complaint or a Petition to Compel Arbitration if their claims are unresolved for more than four years after the accident. This proposed rule contrasts with the existing Arbitration Act of 1927, which only necessitates such filings when an opposing party refuses to arbitrate. The case addresses the accrual of a cause of action within insurance contracts that mandate arbitration, a matter that has been duly preserved for appellate review. After thorough briefing by both parties, the court, with Chief Justice Saylor and other justices concurring, will deliberate on these issues, while Justice Wecht dissents. The outcome of this case will potentially redefine procedural requirements within the realm of insurance arbitration disputes.

Legal Issues Addressed

Accrual of Cause of Action in Insurance Contracts

Application: The court's analysis involves determining when a cause of action accrues in the context of insurance contracts that include mandatory arbitration clauses.

Reasoning: The Court's examination will focus on when a cause of action accrues, particularly in relation to insurance contracts with mandatory arbitration clauses.

Arbitration Act of 1927 and Filing Necessity

Application: The case highlights the contrast between the new requirement proposed by the Superior Court and the Arbitration Act of 1927, which mandates filings only if an opposing party refuses to arbitrate.

Reasoning: This is contrasted with the Arbitration Act of 1927, which states that such filings are only necessary when an opposing party refuses to arbitrate.

Requirement for Filing Complaint or Petition to Compel Arbitration

Application: The case examines whether claimants seeking uninsured or underinsured motorist benefits must file a Complaint or Petition to Compel Arbitration if unresolved after four years, differing from the Arbitration Act of 1927 requirements.

Reasoning: The key issue to be considered is whether the Superior Court, in affirming its decision in Hopkins v. Erie Insurance Co., established a new rule requiring claimants seeking uninsured or underinsured motorist benefits to file a Complaint or a Petition to Compel Arbitration if the claim remains unresolved for more than four years after the accident.