Doctor's Choice v. Traveler's Personal Ins. - No. (Granted) (petitions for allowance of appeal)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT DOCTOR'S CHOICE PHYSICAL MEDICINE & REHABILITATION CENTER, P.C., (LASELVA), Respondent v. TRAVELERS PERSONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner : No. 512 MAL 2014 : : : Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the : Order of the Superior Court : : : : : : : : : ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 31st day of December, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner are: (1) Whether the Superior Court improperly interpreted § 1797 of the MVFRL, the Supreme Court case of Herd Chiropractic v. State Farm, and its own case of Levine v. Travelers, to allow attorneys’ fees even when an insurer has utilized the peer review process? (2) Whether the Superior Court improperly interpreted and misapplied § 1797(b)(4) by holding that the insurer must oversee the statutory compliance of peer review organizations with 31 Pa.Code § 69.53(e)?

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.