Case Name: ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE, Petitioner v. Tracy L. MOORE and Harold E. McCutcheon, III, Individually and as Administrators of the Estate of Harold Eugene McCutcheon, Jr., and Richard A. Carly, Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2018-07-10
Citations: 189 A.3d 382
Docket Number: No. 87 WAL 2018
Parties: ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE, Petitioner
v.
Tracy L. MOORE and Harold E. McCutcheon, III, Individually and as Administrators of the Estate of Harold Eugene McCutcheon, Jr., and Richard A. Carly, Respondents
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 189
Pages: 382–382

Head Matter:
ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE, Petitioner
v.
Tracy L. MOORE and Harold E. McCutcheon, III, Individually and as Administrators of the Estate of Harold Eugene McCutcheon, Jr., and Richard A. Carly, Respondents
No. 87 WAL 2018
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
July 10, 2018
ORDER

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
AND NOW, this 10th day of July, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by Petitioner, are:
1. Does the Superior Court's ruling that shooting a person during a fight, in turn, during a planned murder-suicide, constituted an "occurrence" under a liability insurance policy conflict with Pennsylvania law as established by this Court?
2. Does the Superior Court's ruling conflict with its own decision in American National Property and Casualty Co. v. Hearn, 93 A.3d 880 (Pa.Super. 2014), and misconstrue the intentional acts exclusion of a liability insurance policy?
3. Does the Superior Court's ruling conflict with Pennsylvania public policy, as stated in Mutual Benefit Ins. Co. v. Haver, 555 Pa. 534, 725 A.2d 743, 747 (1999), that liability insurance does not cover damages caused as a result of evil or illegal conduct?