Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1754 (2026)

 Additional coverage.

✓ 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

§ 1754.  Additional coverage.

An eligible claimant who has no other source of applicable uninsured motorist coverage and is otherwise entitled to recover in an action in tort against a party who has failed to comply with this chapter may recover for losses or damages suffered as a result of the injury up to $15,000 subject to an aggregate limit for all claims arising out of any one motor vehicle accident of $30,000. If a claimant recovers medical benefits under section 1753 (relating to benefits available), the amount of medical benefits recovered or recoverable up to $5,000 shall be set off against any amounts recoverable in this section.

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

 

Cross References.  Section 1754 is referred to in section 1757 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1988–2011 · leading case: Pennsylvania Fin. Responsibility Assigned Claims Plan v. English, 664 A.2d 84 (Pa. 1995).
Pennsylvania Fin. Responsibility Assigned Claims Plan v. English, 664 A.2d 84 (Pa. 1995). “§ 1753, but denied appellant uninsured motorist benefits pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S. § 1754. The Plan subsequently filed a Declaratory Judgment action in the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County seeking confirmation of its determination that under the circumstances presented…”
Jackson v. Travelers Ins., 606 A.2d 1384 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1992). · cites it 2× “75 Pa.C.S. § 1754 (emphasis added). The point of discrepancy with respect to Jackson's eligibility is the construction of the term "injury.”
United Servs. Auto. Ass'n v. Shears, 692 A.2d 161 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1997). “Under 75 Pa.C.S. § 1754 of the Assigned Claims Plan, the maximum benefit available to appellee was $15,000, which included the $5,000 maximum medical benefit.”
Kiker v. Pennsylvania Fin. Responsibility Assigned Claims Plan, 742 A.2d 1082 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1999). “75 Pa.C.S. § 1754. 11 . In Hagans , the assignee insurance company was also Constitution State Service.”
Campbell v. New Jersey Auto. Ins., 637 A.2d 226 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1994). “" [3] Travelers relied upon 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 1754, which provides in part: An eligible claimant who has no other source of applicable uninsured motorist coverage and is otherwise entitled to recover in an action in tort against a party who has failed to comply with this…”
Jones-Molina v. Se. Pennsylvania Transp. Auth., 29 A.3d 73 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2011). · cites it 2× “[5] In Adeyward-I , neither SEPTA nor the plaintiff seems to have argued that the Assigned Claims Plan was responsible.”
Edkin v. Travelers Companies, 3 Pa. D. & C.4th 557 (1988). “Plaintiff contends that his injuries were the result of his father’s negligence in operating the automobile, and that defendant, as servicing carrier of plaintiffs claim, is required to provide benefits of up to $15,000 pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S. §1754. However, defendant has…”
Robinson v. Pennsylvania Assigned Claims Plan, 16 Pa. D. & C.4th 256 (1992). “” 75 Pa.C.S. §1754. (17) Since plaintiff is not an “eligible claimant” as that term is defined in §1752 of the MVFRL, the court finds that plaintiff is not entitled to uninsured motorist coverage under §1754.”
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.