Berg, D. v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. - No. (Granted) (petitions for allowance of appeal)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT DANIEL BERG, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS THE EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF SHARON BERG A/K/A SHERYL BERG, Petitioner v. NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Respondent M.D. Appeal Dkt. 33 MAP 2019 : No. 569 MAL 2018 : : : Petition for Allowance of Appeal from : the Order of the Superior Court : : : : : : : : : ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 29th day of March, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issues set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are: a. [D]oes an appellate court abuse its discretion by reweighing and disregarding clear and convincing evidence introduced in the trial court upon which the trial court relied to enter a finding of insurance bad faith? b. [D]id the Superior Court abuse its discretion by reweighing and disregarding clear and competent evidence upon which the trial court relied to support its finding of insurance bad faith [pursuant to the standard set forth in Rancosky v. Washington Nat’l Ins Co., 170 A.3d 364 (Pa. 2017)]? c. Does an insurer that elects under an insurance contract to repair collision damage to a motor vehicle, rather than pay the insured the fair value of the loss directly, have a duty to return the motor vehicle to its insured in a safe and serviceable condition pursuant to national insurance standards, and pursuant to its duty of good faith and fair dealing? Justice Donohue did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
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.
