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.

ROBERT G. WELSCH v. AETNA INSURANCE COMPANY (05/10/85)

filed: May 10, 1985.

ROBERT G. WELSCH, NICHOLAS J. FORTUNATO, RONALD D. WHEATLEY, JAMES R. DUMONT, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL PERSONS IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA SIMILARLY SITUATED, APPELLANTS
v.
AETNA INSURANCE COMPANY, ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN STATES INSURANCE COMPANIES, COMMERCIAL UNION INSURANCE COMPANY, CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANIES, CNA INSURANCE, ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE, FIREMEN'S FUND AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANIES, GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANIES, THE HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, KEMPER INSURANCE COMPANIES, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANIES, MOTORISTS INSURANCE COMPANIES, NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, OHIO CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANIES, TRANSAMERICA INSURANCE GROUP, U.S.F. & G. INSURANCE COMPANIES, U.S. INSURANCE GROUP



No. 01450 Pittsburgh, 1082, Appeal from the Order of November 24, 1982 in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Civil Division, at No. GD 82-06493.

COUNSEL

Harold Gondelman, Pittsburgh, for appellants.

James J. McCabe, Jr., Philadelphia, for Aetna, appellees.

Anthony Vale, Philadelphia, for Hartford, appellee.

Jeffrey B. Clay, Harrisburg, for Nationwide, appellee.

Brosky, Watkins and Hester, JJ.

Author: Hester

[ 343 Pa. Super. Page 171]

On September 27, 1984, the Supreme Court held that gender-based automobile insurance rates were "unfairly discriminatory" within the meaning of the Casualty and Surety Rate Regulation Act (hereinafter "Rate Act").*fn1 See Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co. v. Insurance Commissioner of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 505 Pa. 571, 482 A.2d 542 (1984). In doing so, it affirmed the order of the Insurance Commissioner of Pennsylvania (hereinafter "Commissioner") rescinding his prior approval of gender-based automobile insurance rates.

In the case before us, appellants, a class consisting of male operators under the age of thirty-one years, seek damages as a result of being charged higher premiums pursuant to the gender classification utilized in the determination of rates. The lower court dismissed appellants' complaint, finding that appellants failed to allege state

[ 343 Pa. Super. Page 172]

    action, and finding that the Commissioner retained exclusive jurisdiction over remedial claims. This appeal ensued.

For the reasons that follow, we concur in the finding of the lower court that it lacked jurisdiction, but must disagree with the determination that appellants failed to allege state action.

In their complaint, appellants alleged that the imposition by insurance companies of a sex-related criterion in the promulgation of rates is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Equal Rights Amendment (thereafter "E.R.A.") of the Pennsylvania Constitution.*fn2 Appellees contended in their preliminary objections that the ...


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.