Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
366 results for '* court:"Courts of Common Pleas Lawrence County"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-05-23
Practice Area: Family Law
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Acker
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0471
The court granted plaintiff's motion to list the parties' marital residence for sale where defendant failed to make the necessary mortgage payments, thereby placing a major marital asset at risk, while also failing to explain his conduct and squandering an opportunity to bring the mortgage current. The court of common pleas recommended affirmance.
Publication Date: 2022-05-09
Practice Area: Personal Injury
Industry: Retail
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0413
Defendant was not entitled to summary relief in this premises liability suit as there was sufficient evidence of record, including a store manager's deposition testimony regarding an alleged crack in the sidewalk where plaintiff fell, for a jury to conclude that a crack in the pavement was the cause of plaintiff's fall. The court denied defendant's motion for summary judgment.
Publication Date: 2022-05-02
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Manufacturing
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0375
The court lacked authority to modify a consent order entered into by agreement of the parties where defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into that consent order, and that order's validity did not hinge upon the status of the parties' separate and underlying agreement. The court denied defendant's petition to modify a consent order.
Publication Date: 2022-05-02
Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
Industry: Health Care
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0377
Defendants were entitled to summary relief in this medical malpractice suit brought by the decedent's administratrix because there was no factual support for her expert's opinion that there was a causal connection between the defendant doctor's alleged negligence and the decedent's post-surgical death. The court denied plaintiff's motion for reconsideration.
Publication Date: 2022-05-02
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry: Construction
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0376
The court refused to pierce the corporate veil of the defendant limited liability company in order to hold the individual defendant's wife liable for alleged breach of contract given the parameters of §8834 of Pennsylvania's Limited Liability Statute as well as the strong presumption against piercing the corporate veil. The court denied plaintiff's motion for leave to join a party.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Charles F. Herring, JR, Jason M. Panzer, Leah Turner
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2022-04-25
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Cox
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0297
While the registration requirements that defendant was subjected to in accordance with the Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act caused him certain difficulties, those difficulties did not outweigh the interests in protecting the public from sexually violent offenders by providing them with the necessary information to adequately protect themselves. The court denied defendant's motions to enforce plea agreement and bar sexual offender registration.
Publication Date: 2022-04-25
Practice Area: Landlord Tenant Law
Industry: Real Estate
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Motto
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0298
The court held counterclaimant's allegation that landlord failed to provide proper means for trash disposal and had shut off electricity was sufficient to plead a cause of action under the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. However, without an allegation that defendant was injured and because the landlord's conduct was not outrageous in character, counterclaimant's tort claim should be dismissed. Plaintiff's motion to strike denied in part, granted in part.
Publication Date: 2022-04-11
Practice Area: Wrongful Death
Industry: Retail
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Motto
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0328
The doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel did not bar plaintiff from pressing this negligence suit against the defendant store since issues litigated in a workers' compensation proceeding were different than those at issue here, and there was sufficient evidence to raise a question of fact as to whether defendant's action/inaction was a substantial factor in bringing about the harm suffered by decedent, who was shot by her ex-partner when leaving work. The court denied defendant's motion for summary judgment.
Publication Date: 2022-03-28
Practice Area: Personal Injury
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0240
Court overruled preliminary objections based on failure to attach integral writing to the complaint where the defect could be cured by filing an amended complaint. Defendants' preliminary objections overruled.
Publication Date: 2022-03-28
Practice Area: Trusts and Estates
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Acker
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0241
Preliminary objections to respondents' new matter sustained where order to show cause issued to respondents did not concern the claims raised by respondents that were struck by the preliminary objections. Petitioner's preliminary objections sustained in part and overruled in part.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read