Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

VICTORIA DUBOSE v. STERLING MCCOY (04/18/80)

filed: April 18, 1980.

VICTORIA DUBOSE, A MINOR AND CARMELLA DUBOSE, A MINOR BY THEIR PARENTS AND NATURAL GUARDIANS, BETTY DUBOSE AND ROOSEVELT DUBOSE, AND BETTY DUBOSE AND ROOSEVELT DUBOSE IN THEIR OWN RIGHT, AND EDWARD COOK, A MINOR BY HIS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, ELEASE COOK AND ELEASE COOK IN HER OWN RIGHT
v.
STERLING MCCOY, APPELLANT



No. 3037 October Term, 1978 Appeal from the Judgment of the Court of Common Pleas, Trial Division, of Philadelphia County, dated the 18th day of December 1978 No. 3086, July Term, 1976

COUNSEL

Robert Silverman, Philadelphia, for appellant.

Richard Carl Smukler, Philadelphia, for appellees.

Wieand, Robinson and Louik, JJ.*fn*

Author: Louik

[ 277 Pa. Super. Page 150]

The single issue before this Court is whether the Pennsylvania No-Fault Act (40 P.S. 1009.101, et seq.) or the No-Fault Motor Vehicle Act of New Jersey (N.J.S.A. 39:6A-8) is applicable where the plaintiffs, domiciliaries of New Jersey, are injured in Pennsylvania in an automobile accident, with the defendant a domiciliary of Pennsylvania.

The lower court made findings in favor of the various plaintiffs in a tort action. It appears that this matter is one of first impression in this court.

By stipulation it was agreed that the medical bills for the monetary threshold as to tort liability were in excess of the amount set forth in the applicable New Jersey No-Fault Act but less than the threshold requirements of the Pennsylvania No-Fault Motor Vehicle Insurance Act. The applicable provisions of the Pennsylvania statute are as follows:

"(1) The basic loss benefits available to any victim or to any survivor of a deceased victim shall be determined pursuant to the provisions of the state no-fault plan for

[ 277 Pa. Super. Page 151]

    motor vehicle insurance in effect in the state of domicile of the victim on the date when the motor vehicle accident resulting in injury occurs.

If there is no such state no-fault plan in effect or if the victim is not domiciled in any state, then basic loss benefits available to any victim shall be determined pursuant to the provisions of the state no-fault plan for motor vehicle insurance, if any, in effect in the state in which the accident resulting in injury occurs.

(2) The right of a victim or of a survivor of a deceased victim to sue in tort shall be determined by the law of the state of domicile of such victim. If a victim is not domiciled in a state, such right to sue shall be determined by the law of the state in which the accident ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.