Credit: Mizkit/Adobe StockPa. Appeals Court: Trial Judge Dismissed Med Mal Claims Without Giving Plaintiffs Proper Time to Fight Back
The Pennsylvania Superior Court revived a couple’s medical malpractice claims against a Bucks County podiatrist, ruling that the trial court had acted too hastily in granting the doctor’s motion for summary judgment.
January 02, 2025 at 05:43 PM
4 minute read
What You Need to Know
- The Superior Court revived a medical malpractice lawsuit against a Bucks County podiatrist.
- The panel held that the trial court failed to afford the plaintiffs enough time to reply to the doctor's motion for summary judgment.
- The court ruled that, although the podiatrist's motion was a joinder to a motion filed earlier by another defendant, the plaintiffs should still have had a full 30 days to respond.
The Pennsylvania Superior Court revived a couple’s medical malpractice claims against a Bucks County podiatrist, ruling that the trial court had acted too hastily in granting the doctor’s motion for summary judgment.
The three-judge panel held in a precedential opinion that, although the podiatrist’s motion had simply joined a motion filed earlier by another defendant, the plaintiffs should still have had a full 30 days to respond. And the plaintiffs were deprived of that appropriate response time when the trial court granted both defendants' motions for summary judgment just over a week after the podiatrist filed his joinder, the panel ruled.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Pa. High Court: Concrete Proof Not Needed to Weigh Grounds for Preliminary Injunction Order
4 minute read
With New Civil Jury Selection Rule, Litigants Should Carefully Weigh Waiver Risks
6 minute read
Litigating the Written Word: Parol Evidence Rule and the Gist of the Action Doctrine in Fraud Claims
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1GOP Now Holds FTC Gavel, but Dems Signal They'll Be a Rowdy Minority
- 2Houston-Based Law Firm Overcomes Defamation Suit for Website Warning
- 3The Time Is Now for Employers to Assess Risk of Employees’ Use of DeepSeek
- 4Big Law Partner Co-Launches Startup Aiming to Transform Fund Formation Process
- 5How the Court of Public Opinion Should Factor Into Litigation Strategy
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
