Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Pennsylvania opinions name it 4 courts 1986–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Erie Insurance Exchange v. Claypoolegreen2 sentences2019See Erie Insurance Exchange v. Claypoole, 158, 673 A.2d 348 , 356 n.3 (Pa.Super. 1996) ("As the duty to defend is broader than the duty to indemnify, [plaintiff) could not be required to indemnify [defendant] without also being obligated to defend him."). 2019See Erie Insurance Exchange v. Claypoole, 158, 673 A.2d 348 , 356 n.3 (Pa.Super. 1996) ("As the duty to defend is broader than the duty to indemnify, [plaintiff) could not be required to indemnify [defendant] without also being obligated to defend him."). | 2 | 2 |
Wall Rose Mutual Insurance v. Manrossgreen1 sentence2010Co. v. Manross, 939 A.2d 958, 962 (Pa.Super.2007), appeal denied, 596 Pa. 747 , 946 A.2d 688 (2008) (citation omitted). ¶ 8 “[I]t has been held that an insurer has no duty to defend if the contract of insurance does not include a duty to defend clause[.]” Alexander, supra at 1284 n. 2, citing Widener University v. Fred S. James & Co., Inc., 371 Pa.Super. 79 , 537 A.2d 829 (1988). | 1 | 1 |
Henkel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.green1 sentence2010“It is hornbook law that ‘[t]he duty of a general liability insurer to provide a defense for claims asserted against its insureds is contractual, and the courts will therefore look to the language of the policy at issue to determine an insurer’s defense obligations.’ ” Henkel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., et al., 399 F.Supp.2d 607, 613 (E.D.Pa.2005), affirmed, 271 Fed.Appx. 161 (3rd Cir.(Pa.) 2008), quoting 1 Barry R. | 1 | 1 |
Stidham v. Millvale Sportsmen's Clubgreen2 sentences1998Stidham, 618 A.2d at 945. 1998As made clear in Aetna v. Roe, supra, and Stidham, supra, it is this possibility of coverage which requires PMA to defend, and PMA’s refusal was at “its own peril.” When the complaint is vague and the question of coverage is dependent upon undetermined facts, the insurer has a duty to defend the claim until it is narrowed to one which is patently outside the policy coverage, Stidham, 618 A2d at 945. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Widener University v. Fred S. James & Co.
green
2 sentences2010Co. v. Manross, 939 A.2d 958, 962 (Pa.Super.2007), appeal denied, 596 Pa. 747 , 946 A.2d 688 (2008) (citation omitted). ¶ 8 “[I]t has been held that an insurer has no duty to defend if the contract of insurance does not include a duty to defend clause[.]” Alexander, supra at 1284 n. 2, citing Widener University v. Fred S. James & Co., Inc., 371 Pa.Super. 79 , 537 A.2d 829 (1988). 2010Co. v. Manross, 939 A.2d 958, 962 (Pa.Super.2007), appeal denied, 596 Pa. 747 , 946 A.2d 688 (2008) (citation omitted). ¶ 8 “[I]t has been held that an insurer has no duty to defend if the contract of insurance does not include a duty to defend clause[.]” Alexander, supra at 1284 n. 2, citing Widener University v. Fred S. James & Co., Inc., 371 Pa.Super. 79 , 537 A.2d 829 (1988). | 2 | 1995–2010 |
cluster 757515
green
2 sentences2010Co., 153 F.3d 919 (concluding that an insurer had a duty to defend a claim until a court resolved the question of coverage and rejecting the insurer’s argument that it was entitled to reimbursement of defense costs). 2010Co., 153 F.3d 919 (concluding that an insurer had a duty to defend a claim until a court resolved the question of coverage and rejecting the insurer's argument that it was entitled to reimbursement of defense costs). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
WALL ROSE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. Manross
neutral
2 sentences2010Co. v. Manross, 939 A.2d 958, 962 (Pa.Super.2007), appeal denied, 596 Pa. 747 , 946 A.2d 688 (2008) (citation omitted). ¶ 8 “[I]t has been held that an insurer has no duty to defend if the contract of insurance does not include a duty to defend clause[.]” Alexander, supra at 1284 n. 2, citing Widener University v. Fred S. James & Co., Inc., 371 Pa.Super. 79 , 537 A.2d 829 (1988). 2010Co. v. Manross, 939 A.2d 958, 962 (Pa.Super.2007), appeal denied, 596 Pa. 747 , 946 A.2d 688 (2008) (citation omitted). ¶ 8 “[I]t has been held that an insurer has no duty to defend if the contract of insurance does not include a duty to defend clause[.]” Alexander, supra at 1284 n. 2, citing Widener University v. Fred S. James & Co., Inc., 371 Pa.Super. 79 , 537 A.2d 829 (1988). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Henkel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.
neutral
1 sentence2010“It is hornbook law that ‘[t]he duty of a general liability insurer to provide a defense for claims asserted against its insureds is contractual, and the courts will therefore look to the language of the policy at issue to determine an insurer’s defense obligations.’ ” Henkel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., et al., 399 F.Supp.2d 607, 613 (E.D.Pa.2005), affirmed, 271 Fed.Appx. 161 (3rd Cir.(Pa.) 2008), quoting 1 Barry R. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Ass'n v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Insurance
green
2 sentences2010Humford’s position, during oral argument, that Thyssen was intended to have a post-litigation remedy by means of legal action to recoup Thyssen’s self-expended defense costs at the resolution of the two underlying personal injury cases is at odds with the clear language of the duty to defend provision in question and “Where the language of a contract is clear and unambiguous, a court is required to give effect to that language.” Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association Insurance Company v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Insurance Company, 426 Pa. 453 , 233 A.2d 548 (1967). 2010Humford’s position, during oral argument, that Thyssen was intended to have a post-litigation remedy by means of legal action to recoup Thyssen’s self-expended defense costs at the resolution of the two underlying personal injury cases is at odds with the clear language of the duty to defend provision in question and “Where the language of a contract is clear and unambiguous, a court is required to give effect to that language.” Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association Insurance Company v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Insurance Company, 426 Pa. 453 , 233 A.2d 548 (1967). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Zeitz v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance
green
2 sentences1986In support of this argument, plaintiff cites Zeitz v. Zurich General Accident Liability Insurance Company, 165 Pa. Super. 295 , 67 A.2d 742 (1949). 1986In support of this argument, plaintiff cites Zeitz v. Zurich General Accident Liability Insurance Company, 165 Pa. Super. 295 , 67 A.2d 742 (1949). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.