Burstein v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Decided 2002-07-17

Cited by 133 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

OPINION Chief Justice ZAPPALA. We granted allocatur to determine whether the “regularly used, non-owned car” exclusion and its ensuing contractual restraint on underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage portability violate public policy. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the order of the Superior Court. On September 4, 1993, Sid and Doreen Burstein were driving in Lo…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.