James M Beck

January 23, 2019 | The Legal Intelligencer

In Dittman v. University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, ___ A.3d ___, 2018 WL 6072199 (Pa. Nov. 21, 2018), in the context of cyberhacking litigation, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court changed, and considerably restricted, the scope of the so-called “economic loss doctrine (ELD).

By James M. Beck

9 minute read

December 27, 2018 | The Legal Intelligencer

In the past couple of months, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has decided two waiver decisions of great interest to appellate practitioners. In both cases, the court expanded the scope of waiver.

By James M. Beck

6 minute read

August 16, 2018 | The Legal Intelligencer

Declaratory judgments present particularly vexing issues of appellate procedure. In part, these problems arise from their peculiar nature—seeking a “declaration” of rights in advance of an actual controversy—which can verge on improper advisory opinions.

By James M. Beck

7 minute read

May 31, 2018 | The Legal Intelligencer

Pennsylvania appellate practitioners recite like a mantra the necessity of filing post-trial motions prior to an appeal—and not without reason. Pa R. Civ. P. 227.1 requires that post-trial motions be filed within 10 days of the final decision to preserve issues for appeal.

By James M. Beck

8 minute read

February 15, 2018 | The Legal Intelligencer

It appears that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is serious about cutting back on the collateral order doctrine.

By James M. Beck

7 minute read

November 22, 2017 | The Legal Intelligencer

One of the knottiest problems for appellate counsel in assessing possible waiver issues is how much preservation is enough when it comes to the jury charge.

By James M. Beck

8 minute read

June 01, 2017 | The Legal Intelligencer

Word counts are a way of life in modern appellate practice. The halcyon days of 70-page "briefs" are gone—never to return, see Commonwealth v. Spuck, 86 A.3d 870, 872 (Pa. Super. 2014), (discussing the demise of the 70-page rule); Commonwealth v. Stoppie, 486 A.2d 994, 996 (Pa. Super. 1984), (quoting former Pa. R.A.P. 2135(1)). Page limits invited abuse, such as "substantive arguments and sub-arguments ... set forth in footnotes [and] other compressed texts, such as block quotes or single-spaced bullet points," as in Commonwealth v. Spotz, 18 A.3d 244, 349 (Pa. 2011).

By James M. Beck

6 minute read

February 16, 2017 | The Legal Intelligencer

Pennsylvania appellate practitioners should know about a number of things that have occurred since my last article. Two are rules changes. The third is a most unusual footnote in an en banc Pennsylvania Superior Court decision.

By James M. Beck

15 minute read

November 23, 2016 | The Legal Intelligencer

While somewhat on the order of "Aside from that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?" two Pennsylvania Superior Court decisions, both handed down on Nov. 8, at least provided the basis for this article on appellate practice.

By James M. Beck

12 minute read

October 11, 2016 | The Legal Intelligencer

As all products liability practitioners are aware by now, at the end of 2014, a watershed moment in Pennsylvania products liability law occurred when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided Tincher v. Omega Flex, 104 A.3d 328 (Pa. 2014).

By James M. Beck

18 minute read