IME Requirement in Auto Policy of is Void.

May 10th, 2017

In Sayles v. Allstate, 3:16-CV-01534, 2017 WL 1928408, (M.D. Pa. May 10, 2017), District Court Judge Caputo denied Allstate’s motion to dismiss in a potential class action based on a provision in Allstate’s policy that requires insureds to submit to an IME by a physician chosen by Allstate as a condition precedent to payment of medical expenses. §1796 of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (“MVFRL”) permits an insurer to compel an IME only on a motion “for good cause shown.”

Judge Caputo predicted that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would find that the examination requirement in Allstate’s auto insurance policy conflicts with §1796 of the MVFRL and is therefore void. On May 24, 2017, Allstate filed a motion requesting permission to appeal the May 10, 2017 order, citing the conflicting decisions on this issue in both the state and federal courts.

At 70yrs. of age, I have never been in a car accident, nor have I ever had a moving violation! So, needless to say, that the trauma of being involved in an accident that I did not cause, where my car, (which was only 6mos. old) was totaled!) and I received 2 broken bones in my left ankle that warrented surgery…was nothing short of devastating! It’s been 9mos. and I’m still healing! But while I was in the ER, the only injury attorney’s name and number that came to my mind was Freeburn and the 7’s! Well, in came Ryan McDaniels, and ever since that initial encounter at my home, I was thoroughly convinced that the Lord had orchestrated it! This young man’s demeanor, personality, and integrity was awesome! He kept me well informed and I trusted him emphatically! Not only him, but everyone in their office, showed me the utmost respect and courtesies! I would, without any reservations, refer anyone who asked me, to this firm! They made for me a wonderful experience from the most devastatingly, traumatic situation I’ve ever had! Definitely 2 thumbs up!