Case Name: Edward MISHOE, Respondent, v. ERIE INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner; Nancy L. Hamer, Respondent, v. Federal Kemper Insurance Company, Petitioner
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2000-06-06
Citations: 561 Pa. 604
Docket Number: Petitions Nos. 1197 & 1198 M.D. Alloc. Dkts. 1999
Parties: Edward MISHOE, Respondent, v. ERIE INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner. Nancy L. Hamer, Respondent, v. Federal Kemper Insurance Company, Petitioner.
Judges: 
Reporter: Pennsylvania State Reports
Volume: 561
Pages: 604–604

Head Matter:
752 A.2d 401
Edward MISHOE, Respondent, v. ERIE INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner. Nancy L. Hamer, Respondent, v. Federal Kemper Insurance Company, Petitioner.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
June 6, 2000.
Thomas B. Schmidt, III, Donna L. Fisher, Randy L. Varner, Harrisburg, Joel D. Smith, York, for Erie Ins. Co.
Dara A. Decourcy, Pittsburgh, for Federal Kemper Ins. Co.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM:
AND NOW, this 6th day of June, 2000, the joint Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED and the matter is REMANDED to the Superior Court to reconsider whether 42 Pa.C.S. § 8371 grants a statutory right to a jury trial in light of our recent decision in Wertz v. Chapman Township, 559 Pa. 630, 741 A.2d 1272 (1999) (holding that there is no statutory right to jury trial under Pennsylvania Human Relations Act where statutory language speaks in terms of what "the court finds" and remedial action "the court" may take, where nothing in the legislative history indicated an intent to provide the right to a jury trial). If the Superior Court finds that the statute does not create a right to a jury trial in light of Wertz, it shall address respondents' alternative state constitutional argument. See Wertz, supra, at 1277-79 (setting forth constitutional analysis).