Sparrow v. PACE/CM, Inc., PICS Case No. 11-0286 (C.P. Lackawanna Feb. 7, 2011) Nealon, J. (36 pages).
Because the single entity theory is not cognizable in Pennsylvania, plaintiff’s claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment and a violation of the Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act were dismissed; the gist of the action doctrine barred tortious interference with contract claims and punitive damages claims were dismissed. Plaintiff’s allegations were sufficiently specific and the writing in defendants’ possession did not need to be attached. Defendants’ preliminary objections sustained in part and overruled in part.
