Pizzonia v. Colonial Motors, Inc.

2 Citing cases

  1. Stein v. Kenny Ross Toyota, Inc.

    J-A05005-17 (Pa. Super. Ct. Aug. 9, 2017)

    ... 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 1318(a) and (b). A dealership may not ignore the mandates of Section 1318. Pizzonia v. Colonial Motors, Inc., 639 A.2d 1185, 1187 (Pa.Super. 1994), appeal denied, 540 Pa. 602, 655 A.2d 990 (1995). In fact, "an agent must exercise reasonable effort to determine financial responsibility."

  2. Brown v. Harper

    231 A.D.2d 483 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)   Cited 10 times

    cedures, including the failure to verify insurance, is estopped from denying ownership of the vehicle and is fully liable to the plaintiff as if it were the "owner" of the vehicle ( see, Switzer v Aldrich, 307 NY 56; Reese v Reamore, 292 NY 292; Panzella v Major Chevrolet, 209 AD2d 594; Taylor v Botnick Motor Corp., 146 AD2d 81; Jamison v Walker, 48 AD2d 320). New York law is based on a strong State policy which seeks to ensure that innocent third parties who are injured by an uninsured motorist may recover from a responsible party for the injury and financial loss inflicted upon them ( see, Taylor v Botnick MotorCorp., supra, at 84, 85; Jamison v Walker, supra, at 324; see also, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 310). Under Pennsylvania law, a dealer is liable to an injured third party, not under an imputed ownership theory, but for negligently failing to comply with statutory requirements and its liability is limited to an amount not to exceed the minimum amount of insurance required ( see, Pizzonia v Colonial Motors, 433 Pa Super 9, 639 A2d 1185). Utilizing the "interest analysis" approach to this choice of law issue ( see, Padula v Lilarn Props. Corp., 84 NY2d 519, 521), we conclude that New York law applies.