Rancosky v. Washington National Ins., Co., Pet
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Rancosky v. Washington National Ins., Co., Pet, 144 A.3d 926 (Pa. 2016)
636 Pa. 465; 2016 Pa. LEXIS 1910; 2016 WL 4530028
Per Curiam
Rancosky v. Washington National Ins., Co., Pet
Opinion
ORDER
AND NOW, this 30th day of August, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the is *466 sue[s] set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue[s], as stated by petitioner, is:
Whether this Court should ratify the requirements of Terletsky v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance Co., 437 Pa.Super. 108, 649 A.2d 680 (1994), appeal denied, 540 Pa. 641, 659 A.2d 560 (1995), for establishing insurer bad faith under 42 Pa.C.S. § 8371, and assuming the answer to be in the affirmative, whether the Superior Court erred in holding that Terletsky factor of a “motive of self-interest or ill-will” is merely a discretionary consideration rather than a mandatory prerequisite to proving bad faith?
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Matthew RANCOSKY, Administrator DBN of the Estate of Leann Rancosky and Matthew Rancosky, Executor of the Estate of Martin L. Rancosky, Respondent, v. WASHINGTON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, as Successor by Merger to Conseco Health Insurance Company, Formerly Known as Capital American Life Insurance Company, Petitioner
- Cited By
- 2 cases
- Status
- Published