Pennsylvania Litigation Blog : Pennsylvania Litigation Lawyer & Attorney : Barley Snyder Law Firm : Serving Lancaster, Reading, York, Chambersburg

Pennsylvania has statutorily mandated that insured drivers be afforded coverage for uninsured and underinsured motorists, pursuant to Section 1731 of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law. The purpose of this coverage was to provide an otherwise adequately insured driver protection as a result of an injury from the negligence of another, especially when the negligent driver did not carry enough coverage to compensate for the injuries sustained. 

However, this mandate has created a number of questions. One such question is if a neutral is appointed to render a decision in this matter, and provided with a range for settlement purposes, what effect would that neutral’s decision have, if any, on recovery by Plaintiff in accordance with his or her underinsured policy. 

Continue Reading...

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Pennsylvania law is quite clear that, when confronted with a petition to compel arbitration, the court must engage in a two-step inquiry to decide the threshold issue of "substantive arbitrability."  The court must first determine whether there is a valid arbitration agreement.  If such an agreement exists, the court must next determine whether the dispute before it is encompassed by the agreement.   A plaintiff may assert the absence or invalidity of an underlying agreement as a defense against arbitration. 

In Carlson v. Janney Montgomery Scott LLC, 80 D.&C. 4th 230 (Phila. County April 5, 2007), the plaintiff was required, as a matter of securities regulation, to agree to arbitration of disputes as a condition of his employment as a securities broker.  In support of its motion to compel arbitration, defendant produced an electronically-filed Form U4 registering plaintiff with the NASD as a securities broker.  The electronic filing was made on plaintiff's behalf and, in keeping with SEC regulations, contained the mandatory arbitration agreement.  The electronically-filed U4 did not, however, bear plaintiff's signature.  The court refused to order arbitration:

This motion judge is unable to grant defendant's request [for arbitration] absent proof that plaintiff did in fact agree to arbitrate disputes occurring during his employment or that he signed Form U4, albeit a prerequisite for employment as a financial consultant or registered representative.  Without proof of the original or even a copy of a signed Form U4, this motion judge cannot find that a valid arbitration agreement existed between the parties.

This case illustrates that, despite society's ever-increasing reliance on electronic communications, signed original documents remain of paramount importance when it comes to the enforcement of legal obligations between parties.  For persons entering into agreements -- especially agreements that, like arbitration agreements, affect otherwise existing legal rights -- the bottom line is that signatures still matter.  Get them.  Save them.  Rest easy.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Over at the Volokh Conspiracy there is an interesting series of posts on what one might call the Problem of the Air Force.  The problem, being one only for those espousing a so-called originalist view of the Constitution, is this:  The document confers on the federal government (Congress in particular) the powers "To raise and support Armies" and "To provide and maintain a Navy."  The Constitution, however, says nothing about Congress' power to create an independent Air Force.  As such a force could hardly have been envisioned by the framers -- let alone intended to be encompassed by the terms Armies and Navy -- originalists must concede that such power simply does not exist.  In sum, the U.S. Air Force is unconstitutional. 

As I said, an interesting argument.  Fortunately, it is just plain wrong.  Contrary to what one might initially suspect, aircraft did exist during the time in which the framers toiled:

The first recorded manned balloon flight was made in a hot air balloon built by the Montgolfier brothers on November 21, 1783.

So too did the knowledge, however inadvertently acquired, that such craft could be used to distinct military advantage:

The first aircraft disaster occurred in May 1785 when the town of Tullamore, Co. Offaly Ireland was seriously damaged when the crash of a balloon resulted in a fire that burned down about 100 houses giving the town the unusual distinction of being home to the world's first aviation disaster.

It seems odd, then, that the framers would have deprived the republic of the ability to defend itself from the air.  And, of course, they did not.  A close reading of the constitution reveals the manifestly intentional establishment of a federal Hot Air Force.  See Article I, section 1.  And being thus descended, the modern Air Force remains a perfectly constitutional branch of service.  (With all due apologies to John Cole and Allahpundit).

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

State Farm Insurance Company has agreed to pay approximately $80 million to more than 600 policyholders who sued the company for refusing to cover storm damage resulting from the Katrina natural disaster (and an additional $50 million on previously closed claims). Settlement follows an adverse jury verdict in the initial lawsuit to go to trial regarding these claims.

It is noteworthy that the Judge who has assumed jurisdiction for these claims has ordered dozens of policyholders to participate in an experimental mediation program. Hundreds of other homeowners who have not filed lawsuits already have settled their disputes in a mediation program sponsored by the Mississippi Insurance Commissioner George Dale. The interplay between civil litigation and alternative dispute resolution may help bring a measure of certainty and economic efficiency to both insurance companies and claimants in this disaster scenario. Continue Reading...

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks