History
  • No items yet
midpage
Chatham v. Aetna Life & Casualty Co.
605 A.2d 329
Pa.
1992
Check Treatment

Florence CHATHAM, an individual v. AETNA LIFE & CASUALTY COMPANY and State Farm Mutual Insurance Company. Appeal of AETNA LIFE & CASUALTY COMPANY.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Argued March 10, 1992. Decided April 16, 1992.

605 A.2d 329

Before NIX, C.J., and LARSEN, FLAHERTY, McDERMOTT, ZAPPALA, PAPADAKOS and CAPPY, JJ.

Timothy J. Burdette, Anstandig, Levicoff & McDyer, Pittsburgh, for appellant.

Loraine Smith Tabakin, Pittsburgh, for Florence Chatham.

Frank M. Gianola, Pittsburgh, for State Farm Mut. Ins. Co.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Order affirmed.

LARSEN, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

CAPPY, J., files a concurring opinion.

CAPPY, Justice, concurring.

I concur in the result reached by the Majority in its per curiam affirmance. However, I do not agree that our decision in

Azpell v. Old Republic Insurance Co., 526 Pa. 179, 584 A.2d 950 (1991) is controlling. See,
Hackenberg v. Transp. Authority, 526 Pa. 358, 586 A.2d 879 (1991)
, (Concurring and Dissenting opinion, Cappy, J.).

Case Details

Case Name: Chatham v. Aetna Life & Casualty Co.
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Date Published: Apr 16, 1992
Citation: 605 A.2d 329
Docket Number: Appeal 84 W.D. Appeal Dkt. 1990
Court Abbreviation: Pa.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.