Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1719 (2026)

 Coordination of benefits.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 1719.  Coordination of benefits.

(a)  General rule.--Except for workers' compensation, a policy of insurance issued or delivered pursuant to this subchapter shall be primary. Any program, group contract or other arrangement for payment of benefits such as described in section 1711 (relating to required benefits), 1712(1) and (2) (relating to availability of benefits) or 1715 (relating to availability of adequate limits) shall be construed to contain a provision that all benefits provided therein shall be in excess of and not in duplication of any valid and collectible first party benefits provided in section 1711, 1712 or 1715 or workers' compensation.

(b)  Definition.--As used in this section the term "program, group contract or other arrangement" includes, but is not limited to, benefits payable by a hospital plan corporation or a professional health service corporation subject to 40 Pa.C.S. Ch. 61 (relating to hospital plan corporations) or 63 (relating to professional health services plan corporations).

(Feb. 12, 1984, P.L.53, No.12, eff. Oct. 1, 1984)

 

Cross References.  Section 1719 is referred to in sections 1720, 1722 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases, 1989–2018 · leading case: City of Philadelphia v. F. Zampogna, 177 A.3d 1027 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017).
City of Philadelphia v. F. Zampogna, 177 A.3d 1027 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017). · cites it 3× “75 Pa. C.S. §1719 (emphasis added). The City argues that the Section 1719(b) definition of “program, group contract or other arrangement” cannot be read to include Heart and Lung Act benefits, which bear no similarity to Blue Cross/Blue Shield coverage.”
Ducaji v. Dennis, 656 A.2d 102 (Pa. 1995). · cites it 2× “On appeal to this Court, Ducjai argues that three sections of *107 the MVFRL, 75 Pa.C.S. §§ 1719, 1720, and 1735, [4] can be read to allow recovery separate from compensation received under the Act.”
Oliver v. City of Pittsburgh, 977 A.2d 1232 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2009). · cites it 2× “75 Pa.C.S. § 1719(a). As defined, the term "program, group contract or other arrangement" "includes, but is not limited to, benefits payable by a hospital plan corporation or a professional health service corporation subject to 40 Pa.”
Ducjai v. Dennis, 636 A.2d 1130 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1994). · cites it 2× “75 Pa.C.S. § 1719(a). Section 1720 provides: § 1720.”
Carducci v. Aetna U.S. Healthcare, 247 F. Supp. 2d 596 (D.N.J. 2003). “75 Pa. Cons.Stat. § 1719 (1987). 11 . NJ.”
Fmc Corp. v. Cynthia Ann Holliday, 885 F.2d 79 (3rd Cir. 1989). “75 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 1719 (emphasis added).”
Palmosina v. Laidlaw Transit Co., Inc., 664 A.2d 1038 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1995). “The motion was granted upon the court’s determination that such preclusion was intended by the Pennsylvania legislature as a quid pro quo for elimination of the workers’ compensation carrier’s traditional right of subrogation.”
Wirth v. Aetna U.S. Healthcare, 904 A.2d 858 (Pa. 2006). “75 Pa.C.S. § 1719(b) (emphasis in original).”
Scott v. Erie Ins. Grp., 706 A.2d 357 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1998). “Appellant then cites to 75 Pa.C.S. § 1719, which provides (emphasis in original): (a) General Rule.”
Tannenbaum v. Nationwide Ins., 992 A.2d 859 (Pa. 2010). · cites it 3× “"); 75 Pa.C.S. § 1719(a) ("Any program, group contract or other arrangement for payment of benefits such as described in [the first-party provisions, including Section 1712,] shall be construed to contain a provision that all benefits provided therein shall be in excess of and…”
Liberty Mut. Ins. v. Excalibur Mgmt. Servs., 81 A.3d 1024 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2013). “Appellees also filed a preliminary objection for improper venue, which a Philadelphia judge granted.”
Fed. Kemper Ins. v. Ins. Dep't of the Commonwealth, 600 A.2d 244 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1991). “28-29; see 75 Pa.C.S. § 1719. Moreover, the evidence of record supports the Commissioner’s findings and not Federal Kemper’s argument.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1719(a) — 4 cases
Oliver v. City of Pittsburgh, 977 A.2d 1232 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2009). “75 Pa.C.S. § 1719(a). As defined, the term "program, group contract or other arrangement" "includes, but is not limited to, benefits payable by a hospital plan corporation or a professional health service corporation subject to 40 Pa.”
Ducjai v. Dennis, 636 A.2d 1130 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1994). “75 Pa.C.S. § 1719(a). Section 1720 provides: § 1720.”
Tannenbaum v. Nationwide Ins., 992 A.2d 859 (Pa. 2010). “"); 75 Pa.C.S. § 1719(a) ("Any program, group contract or other arrangement for payment of benefits such as described in [the first-party provisions, including Section 1712,] shall be construed to contain a provision that all benefits provided therein shall be in excess of and…”
Ins. Dep't of Commonwealth v. Allstate Ins., 896 A.2d 1 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2006).
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1719(b) — 2 cases
City of Philadelphia v. F. Zampogna, 177 A.3d 1027 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017). “75 Pa. C.S. §1719 (emphasis added). The City argues that the Section 1719(b) definition of “program, group contract or other arrangement” cannot be read to include Heart and Lung Act benefits, which bear no similarity to Blue Cross/Blue Shield coverage.”
Wirth v. Aetna U.S. Healthcare, 904 A.2d 858 (Pa. 2006). “75 Pa.C.S. § 1719(b) (emphasis in original).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.