Wimer v. Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust Fund

908 A.2d 268, 589 Pa. 254, 2006 Pa. LEXIS 1742
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided September 14, 2006·No. Appeal No. 65 WAL 2005·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 14th day of September 2006, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is granted limited to the following issues:

Did the Superior Court err as a matter of law when it concluded that Appellee Gary E. Wimer (“Wimer”) was not required to exhaust his contractual remedies under the PEBTF’s governing plan documents?

Did the Superior Court err as a matter of law when it concluded that the PEBTF’s right to subrogation is determined as of the date when it reimbursed Wimer’s medical expenses and therefore concluded that the PEBTF should be denied the right of subrogation for any medical payments made on Wimer’s behalf after January 1,1998?

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Wimer v. Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust Fund, 908 A.2d 268, 589 Pa. 254, 2006 Pa. LEXIS 1742 (Pa. 2006).

908 A.2d 268 (Wimer v. Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust Fund) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wimer v. Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust Fund
939 A.2d 843 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2007)