Erie Insurance Exchange v. Bristol, M.

• Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
• Decided: May 24, 2017
• Docket: Erie Insurance Exchange v. Bristol, M. - No. 124 MAP 2016 (Order Amending Order Granting Petition for Allowance of Appeal originally entered December 29, 2016 at 439 MAL 2016)
• Status: Published

Opinion

[J-45-2017] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT

ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE : No. 124 MAP 2016 : : Appeal from the Order of the Superior v. : Court dated 5/27/16 at No. 1119 EDA : 2015 which affirmed the order of the Court : of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, MICHAEL BRISTOL AND RCC, INC., : Civil Division, dated 3/20/15 at No. 2013- : 12947 APPEAL OF: MICHAEL BRISTOL :

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 24th day of May, 2017, the order of December 29, 2016 is

amended to provide as follows:

The Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED to consider the following

issue, as originally framed in the Petition for Allowance of Appeal:

By affirming its Opinion in Hopkins v. Erie Insurance Co., 65 A.3d 452 (Pa. Super. 2013), and ruling that:

(1) a claimant seeking uninsured or underinsured motorist benefits must file a Complaint or a Petition to Compel Arbitration if the claim does not resolve within four years of the date of the underlying accident, and,

(2) a claimant must file a Complaint or Petition to Compel Arbitration, contrary to the plain language of the Arbitration Act of 1927, 42 Pa.C.S. § 7304(a), which requires a claimant to file a Complaint or Petition only when “an opposing party refuse[s] to arbitrate,”

did the Superior Court create a new rule that is contrary to prior decisions of this Court and inconsistent with the plain language of the Arbitration Act? This Court understands this issue to encompass a determination of the time at

which a cause of action accrues – thereby triggering the commencement of the

statutory period for bringing a claim – in the specific context of an insurance contract

containing a mandatory arbitration provision. Notably, this particular issue has not been

waived, was advanced in the Petition for Allowance of Appeal, and has been briefed by

both parties, without objection. As such, no further briefing is necessary.

Chief Justice Saylor files a concurring statement in which Justices Baer, Todd,

Donohue, Dougherty and Mundy join.

Justice Wecht files a dissenting statement.