Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
640 results for '* court:"Courts of Common Pleas Philadelphia"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-11-28
Practice Area: Legal Malpractice
Industry: Agriculture | Distribution and Wholesale | Legal Services
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Padilla
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 02211
Plaintiffs' malpractice claims were time-barred since they first knew or should have known that they had been injured by allegedly erroneous advice back in 2004, when they executed a consent judgment in a Department of Justice investigation of business practices purportedly based on that same advice. The court granted defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings.
Publication Date: 2022-11-28
Practice Area: Evidence
Industry: Health Care
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Foglietta
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 03298
The photographs documenting decedent's painful injuries while in hospital were directly relevant to plaintiff's wrongful death and survival claims, while defendant's argument regarding a discrepancy in the date of the photos went to the weight to be given such evidence at trial. The court recommended affirmance.
Publication Date: 2022-11-28
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Hill
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 06965
Court affirmed the trial court's ruling denying motions to preclude evidence stemming from a MRI noting that while the parties did have difficulty retrieving the MRI images from the third-party imaging company, plaintiff's medical expert received the images and included them in his expert opinion report. The court further found that the jury did not need to conclude that plaintiff had suffered "serious bodily injury" in reaching their award of economic damages.
Publication Date: 2022-11-28
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Manufacturing | Retail
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Shirdan-Harris
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 1358 EDA 2022
Plaintiff could not recover costs he incurred for the installation of two replacement compressors as such costs qualified as consequential damages under Pennsylvania law, which the product's manufacturer and seller expressly excluded in warranties. The court recommended affirmance of its order granting defendants summary judgment.
Publication Date: 2022-11-28
Practice Area: Real Estate
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Street
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 00062
The court granted defendant's request for an appeal of a default judgment after pro se plaintiff failed to accurately name defendant in the caption, body, and service of the complaint.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: HON. ELIOT D. PRESCOTT, JULIE A. LAVOIE
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2022-11-21
Practice Area: Civil Procedure
Industry: Manufacturing | Transportation
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Kennedy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 1222
The court affirmed the decision of the trial court finding that venue was proper because one appellant had sufficient quantity and quality of acts to qualify Philadelphia County as a proper venue. The court additionally held that venue was proper for the remaining appellant under Pa. R.C.P. 1006(c)(1).
Publication Date: 2022-11-21
Practice Area: Civil Procedure
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Cunningham
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 210201867
Plaintiff could not maintain a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress against defendant where she did not file her claim within two years of becoming aware of an audio recording that gave rise to her claim as well as the allegedly negative effect the tape was having on her family. The court recommended affirmance.
Publication Date: 2022-11-21
Practice Area: Personal Injury
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Shreeves-Johns
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 00794
The court affirmed the trial court's order granting a motion to dismiss and denying a motion for leave to file an amended complaint. The court focused on the fact that although appellant knew they had named the wrong party in the complaint's caption, they did not seek to cure this defect until after the applicable statute of limitations had passed. Accordingly, the court noted that the trial court did not err or abuse their discretion.
Publication Date: 2022-11-21
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Patrick
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 806 CD 2022
The court of common pleas dismissed appellant's appeal in this Right to Know Law dispute as she failed to properly prosecute the appeal in accordance with the court's prior orders despite being granted multiple extension in all of her six prior motions for extraordinary relief. The court recommended affirmance.
Publication Date: 2022-10-24
Practice Area: Damages
Industry: Construction
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Hill
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 2436 EDA 2021
Court found against defendants, who raised a statement of matters complained of on appeal challenging the trial court's orders and jury's verdict arising out of a trial for damages stemming from a home repair contract between the parties. Although defendant argued that the court erred in various aspects regarding expert witnesses, the court held that these were harmless errors which did not prevent defendant from presenting their case to the jury.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read