The Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Act bars recovery for pain and suffering, and other non-economic losses when the insured selects the limited tort option. Non-economic losses are only recoverable if the injuries suffered fall within the “serious injury” definition under the policy. A “serious injury” is one which results in death, serious impairment of a bodily function, or permanent disfigurement. When the plaintiff alleges soft tissue injuries, and the resulting impairment is de minimis, a court should grant summary judgment to the defendants.

In Ramos v. Jones, as a result of a car accident between defendant Michael Jones and plaintiff Melanie Ramos, plaintiff alleged that she suffered sprains and strains of her neck and back, mental damages, and economic injuries. Defendants moved for partial summary judgment on the ground that any claims for non-economic losses were barred by the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Act because plaintiff had selected the limited tort option on her insurance policy.

The medical records revealed that plaintiff’s physical injuries amounted to soft tissue damage to her neck and back. Furthermore, there was evidence that plaintiff had a history of neck pain prior to the accident. Plaintiff failed to show how these physical injuries interfered with her daily life aside from missing a few days of work and being unable to participate in physical activities with her children.

The court granted partial summary judgment for the defendants because plaintiff failed to show how the soft tissue injuries resulted in a substantial interference with any bodily function. The court reasoned that the medical records did not support her claims, and the impairment, when viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, was clearly de minimis.

Thanks to Eric Clendening for his contribution to this post. If you have questions or comments, please email Paul at .