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

Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:

  • Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
  • Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
  • Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
  • Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
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.

Coverage & Policy Issues
Auto
Personal Lines