Case ID: a3d_139/html/1255-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Anthony BURKE, by his PNG John BURKE, Respondent v. INDEPENDENCE BLUE CROSS, Petitioner.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    June 15, 2016.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 15th day of June, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issues set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to the remaining issue. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are:

(1) Whether, in an issue of first impression and of critical statewide importance, the Superior Court Majority violated longstanding precedent and deviated from existing law when it read out of Pennsylvania’s Autism Insurance Act a legislatively-created exception that permitted Independence, like all other insurers, to apply general policy exclusions when making coverage determinations for autism-based services?
(2) Whether, in an issue of first impression and statewide importance, the Superior Court’s reliance on the Pennsylvania Insurance ■ Department’s interpretation — which conflicts with the plain language of Act 62 — -is erroneous and cannot be said to salvage the Superior Court Majority’s incorrect result?

The Application for Leave to File Post-Allocatur Communication in the Form of a Reply is DENIED.

Justice WECHT did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.