Under Pennsylvania law, a policy cannot be interpreted to mean anything other than what it says, and disputes over coverage must be resolved only by reference to the provisions of the policy itself. Credit: Caito/Adobe Stock Under Pennsylvania law, a policy cannot be interpreted to mean anything other than what it says, and disputes over coverage must be resolved only by reference to the provisions of the policy itself. Credit: Caito/Adobe Stock

Awaiting argument at the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Kramer v. Nationwide's outcome will be of great interest to attorneys across Pennsylvania, as the outcome could shed light on the question of whether emotional distress is covered as a bodily injury under automobile insurance policies and the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (MVFRL).

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader

  • All PropertyCasualty360.com news coverage, best practices, and in-depth analysis.
  • Educational webcasts, resources from industry leaders, and informative newsletters.
  • Other award-winning websites including BenefitsPRO.com and ThinkAdvisor.com.
NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Auto
Personal Lines
Property & Casualty