Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
148 results for '* judge:"Judge Hodge"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-06-20
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Real Estate
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0581
An agreement did not possess the characteristics of an installment land contract, so the court granted declaratory relief stating that the parties' agreement was a residential lease which was subject to landlord tenant law.
Publication Date: 2022-05-30
Practice Area: Real Estate
Industry: Real Estate
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0502
The court refused to strike plaintiffs' negligence claims based on the gist of the action doctrine since the Home Inspection Law creates a duty on behalf of a home inspector, thereby creating a relationship between the parties during which the tort of negligence was allegedly committed. The court denied defendant's preliminary objections in part.
Publication Date: 2022-05-30
Practice Area: Family Law
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0496
Defendant failed to inform plaintiff or the domestic relations section of a change in circumstances relevant to support in writing or by personal appearance as required by 23 Pa.C.S. §4353(a), thus warranting retroactive modification of plaintiff's spousal award. The court granted plaintiff's motion for reconsideration.
Publication Date: 2022-05-30
Practice Area: Civil Procedure
Industry: Real Estate
Court: Courts of Common Pleas
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0500
The court denied defendant's motion for reconsideration as untimely since a trial court may consider such a motion only if it is filed within 30 days of the entry of the disputed order, while also noting that the mere filing of a motion for reconsideration is insufficient to toll the appeal period. The court recommend 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.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Janet K. Colaneri
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
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.
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: 2022-03-21
Practice Area: Insurance Law
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
Judge: Judge Hodge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0209
The court declined to find a violation of public policy in favor of the plaintiff insured where the language in two motor vehicle coverage policies, which limited inter-policy stacking of underinsured motorist coverage, was not obviously against the public health, safety morals or welfare of the public. The court found in favor of the defendant insurer.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read