Re: L.S., a minor by A.S., Natural Parent and Guardian v. Eschbach

To The Companies In Interest:

In L.S., a Minor by A.S., her Natural Parent and Guardian v. Eschbach, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania holds that "limited tort" does not apply where a person is injured as a pedestrian. The plaintiff was an 11-year-old who was struck by a motor vehicle while attempting to cross a street. The child lived with her mother who was insured under a limited tort policy. Plaintiff in the trial court and the Superior Court unsuccessfully argued that the concept of limited tort only applied when a person sustained injury while driving or operating a motor vehicle. On appeal, the Supreme Court reversed on the basis that it would be "inappropriate . . . to link the recovery rights of an innocent pedestrian with a system designed to reduce the increasing cost of motor vehicle insurance" where "Section 1705 [of the FRL] is silent with regard to pedestrians." For what it is worth, we believe that the case was incorrectly decided.

The opinion read in conjunction with the Supreme Court's opinion in Hoffman v. Troncelliti, 839 A.2d 1013 (Pa. 2003), suggests that the Supreme Court may be inclined to find that a plaintiff is full tort whenever any colorable argument is raised in support of that proposition.

If you would like to read a copy of the opinion, please click here . You can also call Denise Alosi at (215) 665-3321 and request a copy from her. If you have any questions about the case or any other automobile insurance law issues, please feel free to call me.

Very truly yours,

Michael Saltzburg

For further information, please contact Michael Saltzburg, Esquire.
Telephone: 215-665-3340
E-mail: saltzburg@bbs-law.com