Donovon, C. v. State Farm Mutual, Aplt.

[J-110-2020][Baer, C.J. – M.O.]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
EASTERN DISTRICT
COREY DONOVAN; LINDA DONOVAN, : No. 17 EAP 2020
:
Appellees : Certification of Questions of State Law
: from the United States Court of Appeals
v. : for the Third Circuit at No. 19-2733
:
:
:
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE :
INSURANCE COMPANY, :
:
:
Appellant : ARGUED: December 1, 2020
DISSENTING OPINION
JUSTICE SAYLOR DECIDED: August 17, 2021
In Gallagher v. GEICO Indemnity Insurance Co., 650 Pa. 600, 201 A.3d 131(2019), this Court mandated inter-policy stacking upon its refusal to enforce a
household vehicle exclusion where a single customer purchased both policies. See id.
at 613-14, 201 A.3d at 138-39. I dissented in Gallagher, and I have taken the view that
Section 1738 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. §1738, was not meant to invalidate policy
exclusions, including household exclusions, which are designed to allow for the
collection of reasonable premiums in exchange for the insurance provided. See, e.g.,
Erie Ins. Exch. v. Baker, 601 Pa. 355, 367, 972 A.2d 507, 514-15 (2008) (Saylor, J.,
concurring in result); see also Gallagher, 650 Pa. at 615, 201 A.3d at 139 (Wecht, J.,
dissenting).1
I recognize that I am bound by the holding of Gallagher. Nevertheless, the
present decision represents an extension of that holding to the distinct circumstance
where two different individuals purchased the policies in question. Thus, I note my
dissent here as well.
1 Indeed, a reasonable argument can be made that the General Assembly expected that
such exclusions would be the ordinary means by which inter-policy stacking would, in
effect, be waived; the relevant statutory provisions only discuss the concept of stacking
as such in relation to a single policy, and the sole statutory form by which an insured
may waive stacking also contemplates only intra-policy stacking. See 75 Pa.C.S.
§1738(b)-(d); Majority Opinion, slip op. at 12 n.9.
[J-110-2020][M.O. – Baer, C.J.] - 2