Case ID: pa_606/html/0050-02.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

994 A.2d 1083
    Nancy A. WHITE, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated, Respondent v. CONESTOGA TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    May 19, 2010.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 19th day of May 2010, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

In reversing the Common Pleas Court’s dismissal of this action for lack of jurisdiction by reason of the administrative remedy provided by the TICA at 40 P.S. § 910 — 44(b), did the Superior Court err by holding that the statutory and decisional rule that adequate administrative remedies are exclusive does not apply to consumer class actions?