In a recent decision in Jones v. Erie Ins. Exch., 2024 PA Super 139 (July 3, 2024) (approved for publication, no citation yet available), the Superior Court of Pennsylvania considered the validity of the “regular use exclusion” in uninsured/underinsured benefits (“UM/UIM”) auto insurance policies subject to the recent Supreme Court decision in Rush v. Erie Ins. Exch., 308 A.3d 780 (Pa. 2024). In Jones, the claimant that was injured while occupying his employer’s truck while in the course and scope of his employment. The truck was not insured for UM/UIM benefits and thus the claimant sought benefits from his own household policy. The insurer denied benefits under the “regular use exclusion” and the claimant challenged the exclusion as violative of the statutory requirements of Section 1731 and 1738 of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Laws (“MVFRL”) as well as public policy. Specifically, the claimant urged that his purchase of UM benefits precluded denial of those benefits under the exclusion pursuant to Section 1731 of the MVFRL. Moreover, the claimant argued that his payment of an additional premium for “stacking” of UM benefits on his policy precluded the application of the exclusion to deny those benefits, where no “stacking waiver” pursuant to Section 1738 of the MVFRL was ever obtained by the insurer.
The Superior Court rejected both arguments. In analyzing the Supreme Court’s decision in Rush, the three-judge panel in Jones explained that Rush unambiguously held regular use exclusions do not violate the MVFRL, constitute a permissible limitation of UIM coverage, and comport with prior Supreme Court precedent. In applying the Rush decision broadly, the Superior Court affirmed the trial court in applying the exclusion and held that the “regular use exclusion” remains a viable limitation in UM/UIM auto insurance policies in Pennsylvania.
The Jones decision can be found here.
For additional questions, please contact Glen Shikunov, Esq. and/or Scott Tredwell, Esq.
This article was prepared by McCormick & Priore, P.C. to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is in no way intended to provide legal advice or to create an attorney-client relationship. All Rights Reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of McCormick & Priore, P.C.
