Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Litigation Blogs -> How Appealing

Litigation

: How Appealing

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania summarily reverses lower court ruling which held that an insurer's attempt to appoint guardian for minor plaintiff whose parents are refusing to accept the insurer's settlement offer is not an abuse of process

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania summarily reverses lower court ruling which held that an insurer's attempt to appoint guardian for minor plaintiff whose parents are refusing to accept the insurer's settlement offer is not an abuse of process: On Thursday of last week, Pennsylvania's highest court issued a summary reversal in a case captioned Cruz v. Princeton Insurance Co.

Originally, the trial court dismissed the lawsuit on summary judgment. Next, a three-judge panel of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania voted 2-1 to reverse and remand for trial by means of a non-precedential ruling. The Superior Court next granted reargument en banc -- which set aside the three-judge panel's reversal -- and the en banc ruling affirmed the trial court's entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendants by a 7-2 vote.

I was then hired by counsel for plaintiffs to prepare a petition for allowance of appeal seeking Pa. Supreme Court review. The petition for allowance of appeal that I drafted presented the following question:

Whether a judgment debtor or its insurance company, which initiates a proceeding to appoint a guardian ad litem for an injured minor judgment creditor to pressure the minor's parents to settle the litigation for less money, can be sued for abuse of process for having used the guardian ad litem procedure "primarily to accomplish a purpose for which the process was not designed."

Both defendants filed briefs in opposition arguing against Pa. Supreme Court review. The Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure do not authorize reply briefs in support of a petition for allowance of appeal.

Most recently, on Thursday of last week, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania issued its order granting allowance of appeal and summarily reversing on the issue on which that court's review was sought. The Legal Intelligencer -- Philadelphia's daily newspaper for lawyers -- has previously covered the case, although registration is required to access those articles.

Full post as published by How Appealing on June 03, 2008 (boomark / email).