§ 1738. Stacking of uninsured and underinsured benefits and option to waive.
(a) Limit for each vehicle.--When more than one vehicle is insured under one or more policies providing uninsured
or underinsured motorist coverage, the stated limit for uninsured or underinsured
coverage shall apply separately to each vehicle so insured. The limits of coverages
available under this subchapter for an insured shall be the sum of the limits for
each motor vehicle as to which the injured person is an insured.
(b) Waiver.--Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), a named insured may waive coverage
providing stacking of uninsured or underinsured coverages in which case the limits
of coverage available under the policy for an insured shall be the stated limits for
the motor vehicle as to which the injured person is an insured.
(c) More than one vehicle.--Each named insured purchasing uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage for more
than one vehicle under a policy shall be provided the opportunity to waive the stacked
limits of coverage and instead purchase coverage as described in subsection (b). The
premiums for an insured who exercises such waiver shall be reduced to reflect the
different cost of such coverage.
(d) Forms.--
(1) The named insured shall be informed that he may exercise the waiver of the stacked
limits of uninsured motorist coverage by signing the following written rejection form:
UNINSURED COVERAGE LIMITS
By signing this waiver, I am rejecting stacked limits of uninsured motorist coverage
under the policy for myself and members of my household under which the limits of
coverage available would be the sum of limits for each motor vehicle insured under
the policy. Instead, the limits of coverage that I am purchasing shall be reduced
to the limits stated in the policy. I knowingly and voluntarily reject the stacked
limits of coverage. I understand that my premiums will be reduced if I reject this
coverage.
|
|
|
|
|
Signature of First Named Insured
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date
|
(2) The named insured shall be informed that he may exercise the waiver of the stacked
limits of underinsured motorist coverage by signing the following written rejection
form:
UNDERINSURED COVERAGE LIMITS
By signing this waiver, I am rejecting stacked limits of underinsured motorist coverage
under the policy for myself and members of my household under which the limits of
coverage available would be the sum of limits for each motor vehicle insured under
the policy. Instead, the limits of coverage that I am purchasing shall be reduced
to the limits stated in the policy. I knowingly and voluntarily reject the stacked
limits of coverage. I understand that my premiums will be reduced if I reject this
coverage.
|
|
|
|
|
Signature of First Named Insured
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date
|
(e) Signature and date.--The forms described in subsection (d) must be signed by the first named insured and
dated to be valid. Any rejection form that does not comply with this section is void.
(Feb. 7, 1990, P.L.11, No.6, eff. July 1, 1990)
1990 Amendment. Act 6 added section 1738.
Notes of Decisions
Craley v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 895 A.2d 530 (Pa. 2006).
· cites it 28× “al in this matter to address the interplay between coverage exclusions in motor vehicle insurance policies, including the household vehicle exclusion previously found enforceable by this Court, [1] and the statutory provision of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility *532…”
Generette v. Donegal Mut. Ins. Co., 957 A.2d 1180 (Pa. 2008).
· cites it 20× “§ 1733, [1] governing the priority of recovery of uninsured or underinsured motorist insurance under the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law ("MVFRL"), and the MVFRL's provision for the waiver of stacking of underinsured motorist coverage, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. [2] We hold…”
Gallagher, B., Aplt. v. Geico Indem., 201 A.3d 131 (Pa. 2019).
· cites it 5× “JUSTICE BAER This appeal requires the Court to determine whether a "household vehicle exclusion" contained in a motor vehicle insurance policy violates Section 1738 of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law ("MVFRL"), 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738, because the exclusion…”
Sackett v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 940 A.2d 329 (Pa. 2007).
· cites it 10× “See 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. Sackett I held that, even where stacked coverage has been previously waived under Section 1738(b) via the execution of a valid waiver form as contemplated by Section 1738(d), upon the addition of a new vehicle to a multi-vehicle automobile insurance…”
Everhart v. PMA Ins. Grp., 938 A.2d 301 (Pa. 2007).
· cites it 12× “______________________ Signature of First Named Insured ______________________ Date 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. Contrary to the Estate's assertion, we do not find this language to be an unambiguous indication that stacking is mandated under a commercial fleet policy.”
Sackett v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 919 A.2d 194 (Pa. 2007).
· cites it 9× “Such a purchase of UM/UIM coverage occurred under the facts presented in this case, but the insured was denied the opportunity to waive the increased amount of available stacked UM/UIM coverage.”
Toner v. Travelers Home & Marine Ins., 137 A.3d 583 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
· cites it 7× “If the clause is finite, the insurer will be required to provide the insured new UM/UIM waiver forms.”
Egan v. USI Mid-Atl., Inc., 92 A.3d 1 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
· cites it 5× “See 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. This default stacking may be rejected and, again, the statute provides the language for this waiver.”
Timothy Rupert v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 291 F.3d 243 (3rd Cir. 2002).
· cites it 7× “He interprets the Pennsylvania statute that applies to waivers of stacking, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738, to require that the waiver be signed by the current first named insured on a policy in order to be valid.”
Rupert v. Liberty Mut. Ins., 781 A.2d 132 (Pa. 2001).
· cites it 6× “— When more than one vehicle is insured under one or more policies providing uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage, the stated limit for uninsured or underinsured coverage shall apply separately to each vehicle so insured.”
Ford, A., Aplt. v. Am. States Ins., 154 A.3d 237 (Pa. 2017).
· cites it 3× “75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. [J-108-2016] - 5 Appellant next turned to the Superior Court’s opinion in Jones v.”
State Auto Prop. & Cas. Ins. v. Pro Design, P.C., 566 F.3d 86 (3rd Cir. 2009).
· cites it 2× “75 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 1738(a). Section 1738(b), however, provides that, notwithstanding § 1738(a), “a named insured may waive coverage providing stacking of uninsured or underinsured coverages in which case the limits of coverage available under the policy for an insured…”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1738(a) — 42 cases
Gallagher, B., Aplt. v. Geico Indem., 201 A.3d 131 (Pa. 2019).
“JUSTICE BAER This appeal requires the Court to determine whether a "household vehicle exclusion" contained in a motor vehicle insurance policy violates Section 1738 of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law ("MVFRL"), 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738, because the exclusion…”
Craley v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 895 A.2d 530 (Pa. 2006).
“al in this matter to address the interplay between coverage exclusions in motor vehicle insurance policies, including the household vehicle exclusion previously found enforceable by this Court, [1] and the statutory provision of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility *532…”
Generette v. Donegal Mut. Ins. Co., 957 A.2d 1180 (Pa. 2008).
“§ 1733, [1] governing the priority of recovery of uninsured or underinsured motorist insurance under the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law ("MVFRL"), and the MVFRL's provision for the waiver of stacking of underinsured motorist coverage, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. [2] We hold…”
Sackett v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 919 A.2d 194 (Pa. 2007).
“Such a purchase of UM/UIM coverage occurred under the facts presented in this case, but the insured was denied the opportunity to waive the increased amount of available stacked UM/UIM coverage.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1738(b) — 13 cases
Generette v. Donegal Mut. Ins. Co., 957 A.2d 1180 (Pa. 2008).
“§ 1733, [1] governing the priority of recovery of uninsured or underinsured motorist insurance under the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law ("MVFRL"), and the MVFRL's provision for the waiver of stacking of underinsured motorist coverage, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. [2] We hold…”
Craley v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 895 A.2d 530 (Pa. 2006).
“al in this matter to address the interplay between coverage exclusions in motor vehicle insurance policies, including the household vehicle exclusion previously found enforceable by this Court, [1] and the statutory provision of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility *532…”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1738(c) — 16 cases
Sackett v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 940 A.2d 329 (Pa. 2007).
“See 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. Sackett I held that, even where stacked coverage has been previously waived under Section 1738(b) via the execution of a valid waiver form as contemplated by Section 1738(d), upon the addition of a new vehicle to a multi-vehicle automobile insurance…”
Craley v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 895 A.2d 530 (Pa. 2006).
“al in this matter to address the interplay between coverage exclusions in motor vehicle insurance policies, including the household vehicle exclusion previously found enforceable by this Court, [1] and the statutory provision of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility *532…”
Generette v. Donegal Mut. Ins. Co., 957 A.2d 1180 (Pa. 2008).
“§ 1733, [1] governing the priority of recovery of uninsured or underinsured motorist insurance under the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law ("MVFRL"), and the MVFRL's provision for the waiver of stacking of underinsured motorist coverage, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. [2] We hold…”
State Auto Prop. & Cas. Ins. v. Pro Design, P.C., 566 F.3d 86 (3rd Cir. 2009).
“75 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 1738(a). Section 1738(b), however, provides that, notwithstanding § 1738(a), “a named insured may waive coverage providing stacking of uninsured or underinsured coverages in which case the limits of coverage available under the policy for an insured…”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1738(d) — 26 cases
Sackett v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 919 A.2d 194 (Pa. 2007).
“Such a purchase of UM/UIM coverage occurred under the facts presented in this case, but the insured was denied the opportunity to waive the increased amount of available stacked UM/UIM coverage.”
Craley v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 895 A.2d 530 (Pa. 2006).
“al in this matter to address the interplay between coverage exclusions in motor vehicle insurance policies, including the household vehicle exclusion previously found enforceable by this Court, [1] and the statutory provision of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility *532…”
Egan v. USI Mid-Atl., Inc., 92 A.3d 1 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
“See 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. This default stacking may be rejected and, again, the statute provides the language for this waiver.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1738(d)(1) — 5 cases
Craley v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 895 A.2d 530 (Pa. 2006).
“al in this matter to address the interplay between coverage exclusions in motor vehicle insurance policies, including the household vehicle exclusion previously found enforceable by this Court, [1] and the statutory provision of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility *532…”
Egan v. USI Mid-Atl., Inc., 92 A.3d 1 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
“See 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. This default stacking may be rejected and, again, the statute provides the language for this waiver.”
Everhart v. PMA Ins. Grp., 938 A.2d 301 (Pa. 2007).
“______________________ Signature of First Named Insured ______________________ Date 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. Contrary to the Estate's assertion, we do not find this language to be an unambiguous indication that stacking is mandated under a commercial fleet policy.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1738(d)(2) — 6 cases
Everhart v. PMA Ins. Grp., 938 A.2d 301 (Pa. 2007).
“______________________ Signature of First Named Insured ______________________ Date 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. Contrary to the Estate's assertion, we do not find this language to be an unambiguous indication that stacking is mandated under a commercial fleet policy.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1738(d)(l) — 1 case
Everhart v. PMA Ins. Grp., 938 A.2d 301 (Pa. 2007).
“______________________ Signature of First Named Insured ______________________ Date 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738. Contrary to the Estate's assertion, we do not find this language to be an unambiguous indication that stacking is mandated under a commercial fleet policy.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1738(e) — 11 cases
Craley v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 895 A.2d 530 (Pa. 2006).
“al in this matter to address the interplay between coverage exclusions in motor vehicle insurance policies, including the household vehicle exclusion previously found enforceable by this Court, [1] and the statutory provision of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility *532…”
Rupert v. Liberty Mut. Ins., 781 A.2d 132 (Pa. 2001).
“— When more than one vehicle is insured under one or more policies providing uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage, the stated limit for uninsured or underinsured coverage shall apply separately to each vehicle so insured.”
Timothy Rupert v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 291 F.3d 243 (3rd Cir. 2002).
“He interprets the Pennsylvania statute that applies to waivers of stacking, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1738, to require that the waiver be signed by the current first named insured on a policy in order to be valid.”
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.