Filter This View

  • Owens v. Huffman

    Publication Date: 2022-08-29
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry: Real Estate | State and Local Government
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Motto
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 22-0876

    The defendant township was not a joint tortfeasor with its co-defendants in this suit due to its standing as a governmental agency and concomitant immunity; therefore, the co-defendants could not recover on and thus pursue claims of indemnity or contribution from the township. The court sustained the defendant township's preliminary objections.

  • Commonwealth v. Emery

    Publication Date: 2022-08-08
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Motto
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 22-0216

    While private homes may not be constitutionally entered to conduct a search or effectuate an arrest without a warrant, the police entry of defendant's home was not unlawful as the record demonstrated that he voluntarily gave consent to police to enter his home. The court denied defendant's pre-trial motions.

  • Watkins v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.

    Publication Date: 2022-05-30
    Practice Area: Insurance Litigation
    Industry: Insurance
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Motto
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 22-0497

    Insured's claim for negligence against his insurer was barred by the gist of the action doctrine, and the amended complaint did not allege sufficient facts to sustain a breach of fiduciary duty claim against the insurer in connection with the sale of an insurance policy.

  • Capmar Prop., L.P. v. Gwin

    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.

  • Prowell v. Wal-Mart Stores E., L.P.

    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.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Chester County Court Rules 2024

    Authors:

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Commonwealth v. Stewart

    Publication Date: 2022-03-28
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Motto
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 22-0239

    Officers conducted illegal search and seizure after reaching into individual's pocket to grab their hand without articulable facts giving rise to reasonable suspicion that individual was engaged in criminal activity or posed a threat. Defendant's omnibus motion granted, case dismissed.

  • Piccirillo v. Johnston

    Publication Date: 2022-02-28
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Real Estate
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Motto
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 22-0121

    The court held that it was bound to accept all factual averments in respondent's answer as having been admitted because of the application of Pa.R.C.P. 206.7 and petitioner's failure to conduct discovery. Motion denied.

  • Margel v. Noga Ambulance Serv., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-01-10
    Practice Area: Health Care Law
    Industry: Health Care | Transportation
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Motto
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-1429

    Plaintiff had no private right of action under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act for defendants' alleged disclosure of her private medical information, and she could not circumvent the mechanics of that act by pursuing claims for negligence per se relating to defendants' alleged violations of HIPAA. The court sustained defendants' preliminary objection in part.

  • Ash v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2021-11-01
    Practice Area: Toxic Torts
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Motto
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-1130

    In this strict liability asbestos exposure suit, the court held that plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to meet the frequency, duration and proximity test from Eckenrod v. GAF Corp., 544 A.2d 50 (Pa. Super. 1988) such that defendant's motion for summary judgment must fail. Motion denied.

  • Cialella v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co.

    Publication Date: 2021-09-06
    Practice Area: Insurance Law
    Industry: Insurance
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Motto
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-0866

    Insurer was not entitled to summary judgment in this motor vehicle injury case involving limited tort coverage, because genuine issues of material fact existed about whether plaintiff suffered serious injuries.