2009 Pa. Super. 192 - Pusl v. Means’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 454 Pa. Super. 188 - Somerset Community Hospital v. Allan B. Mitchell & Associates, Inc. · Johnson v. Beane · 364 Pa. Super. 196 - Allstate Insurance v. Clarke · 441 Pa. Super. 103 - Boyle v. Erie Insurance · Panichelli v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Group
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“§ 1722 Preclusion of recovering required benefits In any action for damages against a tortfeasor, or in any uninsured or under-insured motorist proceeding, arising out of the maintenance or use of a motor vehicle, a person who is eligible to receive benefits under the coverages set forth in this subchapter, or workers’ compensation, or any program, group contract or other arrangement for payment of benefits as defined in section 1719 (relating to coordination of benefits) shall be precluded from recovering the amount of benefits paid or payable under this subchapter, or workers’ compensation or other arrangement for payment of benefits as defined in section 1719.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Appellant’s UIM benefits fall within Section 1722’s first-party benefits because the UIM benefit was paid to her from her personal insurance policy with State Farm.” See Tannenbaum v. Nationwide Ins. Co., 919 A.2d 267, 270 (Pa.Super.2007) (discussing”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.