212 Pa. Super. 89 | Pa. Super. Ct. | 1968
Opinion by
This is a companion case to Smith v. Safeguard Mut. Ins. Co., 212 Pa. Superior Ct. 83, 239 A. 2d 824 (1968), in which an opinion was filed today. Appellee claimed damages under the uninsured motorist provision of a policy issued by appellant. The dispute was submitted to arbitration pursuant to the same arbitration clause recited in full in the Smith case.
The sole issue raised on this appeal is whether the instant arbitration is subject to the provisions of the
We thus conclude that the lower court’s dismissal of the appellant’s motion to open judgment, which is the only matter before this court, was correct.
Affirmed.
Except that this policy refers to the clause as a “part” rather than an “endorsement”.