Erie Insurance Exchange v. Richard Russo

Summary

The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed a declaratory judgment denying Richard Russo underinsured motorist coverage under his personal Erie policy for an accident involving an employer-provided vehicle. The court held that Russo was not an insured under the employer’s policy for purposes of stacking under Section 1738 of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law because he was neither a named insured nor otherwise a qualifying class-one insured. Accordingly, Russo could not stack his personal UIM coverage with the benefits received under the employer’s policy, and the court affirmed on different grounds.

Holdings

1. Russo was not an insured under the Donegal policy for purposes of Section 1738 because he was not identified as an insured under the policy, did not fall within the statutory definition of insured in Section 1702, and did not qualify as a class-one insured under Pennsylvania decisional law.
2. Receiving UIM coverage as an occupant of a first-priority vehicle does not make the occupant an insured under that vehicle's policy or entitle the occupant to stack personal-policy UIM coverage under Section 1738.
3. The challenge to the regular-use exclusion was moot because Russo had no Section 1738 right to stack his Erie UIM coverage with the Donegal benefits.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Russo was an insured under his employer's Donegal policy for purposes of inter-policy stacking under 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738.
2. Whether an employee who receives UIM benefits as an occupant of an employer-provided vehicle may stack UIM coverage purchased under the employee's personal policy.
3. Whether the regular-use exclusion in Russo's Erie policy unlawfully waived or defeated a right to stack under the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law.
4. Whether the trial court erred in relying on Erie Insurance Exchange v. Mione and Major v. Cruz.

Disposition

affirmed