Limited tort generally costs less than full tort, but the premium difference varies by insurer, driver, vehicle, and policy. After a serious crash, the tort election can substantially affect which categories of damages you may pursue.
Most Philadelphia drivers made this election years ago and never thought about it again. It appears on the declarations page of your auto policy as a single checked box. That box binds you and every member of your household covered by the policy, and it cannot be changed after a crash has already happened.
If you were recently injured, this page explains what your election means, when it does not apply, and why the answer often determines whether a claim is worth pursuing.
Pennsylvania’s Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, at 75 Pa.C.S. § 1705, gives drivers a choice that most states do not offer.
Full tort preserves your unrestricted right to sue. After a crash caused by someone else, you can pursue every category of loss: medical bills, lost wages, out-of-pocket costs, and non-economic damages such as pain, suffering, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life.
Limited tort lowers the premium in exchange for giving up part of that right. It does not prevent you from pursuing otherwise recoverable economic damages such as medical expenses and lost income. What you generally lose is the ability to recover non-economic damages such as pain and suffering, unless your injuries clear a specific legal threshold or a statutory exception applies.
That distinction can matter enormously in practice. In many injury claims, non-economic damages can represent a substantial share of the total value, so a limited tort election may materially reduce what can be recovered unless the serious-injury threshold or an exception applies.
If you elected limited tort, the primary path to pain and suffering damages runs through the serious injury threshold.
Pennsylvania defines serious injury at 75 Pa.C.S. § 1702 as an injury resulting in one of three outcomes:
The first and third categories are rarely disputed. Nearly every contested limited tort case turns on the middle one.
Pennsylvania courts assess serious impairment of a body function by asking whether the impairment is objectively verifiable through medical evidence, whether it affects an important body function rather than a minor one, and whether it meaningfully affects the person’s ability to lead their normal life.
That is a factual question, not a formula. It turns on medical documentation, treatment records, and evidence of what the injured person can no longer do. Pain alone, without measurable functional loss, is a difficult case. Documented loss of mobility, nerve damage that does not resolve, or measurable strength deficits are far stronger.
Notably, an injury does not have to be permanent to qualify. Pennsylvania courts have found that temporary injuries can meet the threshold when they substantially disrupt normal life for an extended period.
This is the part most injured drivers never learn, and it changes outcomes regularly.
Under 75 Pa.C.S. § 1705(d), the limited tort restriction falls away entirely in several situations. When one of these applies, you may recover non-economic damages exactly as though you had elected full tort.
The at-fault driver was convicted of DUI or accepted ARD. Drunk driving crashes frequently restore full tort rights. See our page on drunk driving accidents [/drunk-driving-accidents].
The at-fault vehicle was registered in another state. Out-of-state plates on the other car can lift the restriction.
The at-fault driver was uninsured. No coverage on the other side restores your rights against that driver.
The at-fault driver intended to cause injury. Deliberate conduct removes the restriction.
You were occupying a vehicle that is not a private passenger motor vehicle. Pennsylvania defines a private passenger vehicle as having four wheels, which is why motorcycle riders are generally not bound by a limited tort election.
You were a pedestrian or a bicyclist. If you were struck by a car while walking or riding a bike, your own auto policy election does not restrict you. This surprises people constantly. It is directly relevant to our pedestrian accident [/pedestrian-accidents] practice.
Because these exceptions turn on facts that are not always obvious at the scene, an early investigation matters. Whether the other driver was charged, what state their vehicle was registered in, and whether they carried coverage are all questions worth answering before anyone concludes a claim is limited.
Consider two drivers injured in the same intersection collision on Broad Street. Both suffer a herniated disc. Both incur $40,000 in medical bills and miss three months of work.
The full tort driver can pursue economic losses plus pain, suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life. The limited tort driver recovers the medical bills and lost wages, then has to prove serious impairment of a body function before a jury will consider anything more.
Same crash. Same injury. Very different claim.
This is why insurers ask about your tort election early, and why the answer often shapes their entire negotiating posture. A carrier that believes you are locked into limited tort with a soft tissue injury will value the file accordingly.
Establishing that a threshold has been met, or that an exception applies, requires medical evidence organized for that specific legal question. It is not something that happens by accident during routine treatment.
Most people do not know. Here is how to find out.
Pull the declarations page of your auto insurance policy. The tort election appears there, usually labeled “Tort Option,” “Limited Tort,” or “Full Tort.” If you cannot locate the document, your insurer or agent can provide it.
Two points worth understanding. First, the election is binding on everyone in your household covered by that policy, including a teenage driver who never saw the paperwork. Second, when more than one policy is potentially involved, the analysis of which election controls is not always straightforward.
Do not assume a limited tort election ends the conversation. Have the facts reviewed first.
No. The election in place at the time of the crash controls that claim. You can change your election going forward for future accidents by contacting your insurer.
No. Economic damages, including medical treatment and lost income, remain recoverable regardless of which option you elected. The restriction applies only to non-economic damages.
That is a personal insurance decision, and we cannot tell you which option is right for your policy. Limited tort generally costs less than full tort, but the actual premium difference varies by insurer and driver. The legal difference after a serious injury can be substantial because full tort preserves broader access to non-economic damages.
Your own household policy election generally follows you as a passenger. If you have no auto policy of your own and are not covered under a household policy, different rules may apply.
The exception for vehicles that are not private passenger motor vehicles can be relevant here, depending on the facts. Our truck accident [/truck-accidents] page covers these claims in more detail.
If an adjuster has told you that limited tort limits what you can recover, that statement may be correct. It may also be incomplete. The exceptions above apply more often than most injured drivers realize, and the serious injury threshold is a factual question that deserves a real evaluation.
Tucker Law Group reviews these questions at no cost. We work on a contingency basis, so there is no fee unless we recover for you.
Call 215-875-0609 in Pennsylvania or 856-574-4443 in New Jersey, or request a free case evaluation
To learn more about how we handle crash claims, visit our car accident attorney in Philadelphia, PA page.
Tucker Law Group is built for high-stakes litigation. Catastrophic injury trials. Institutional crises. Bet-the-company complex multiparty civil litigation.
We are not volume litigators. We are litigators who are trial lawyers. When the consequences are permanent – financial, reputational, or personal – clients call us.
We deliver the strategic depth and sophistication of a national firm without lawyers of bureaucracy. Every case receives senior-level attention, disciplined preparation, and trial-focused strategy from day one.
Our size is intentional. It allows us to move faster, prepare harder, and stay personally invested in every outcome.
Other lawyers hire us. Institutions turn to us in moments of exposure and scrutiny. Individuals rely on us when their lives have been permanently altered.
We are regularly engaged as lead trial counsel, co-counsel, and conflicts counsel in complex, high-visibility civil litigation.
Our reputation is earned where it matters most – in the courtroom one case at a time.