Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
108 results for '* topic:"Civil Appeals"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-03-21
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry: Financial Services and Banking
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge Trauger
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0182
The court of common pleas lacked jurisdiction to consider defendants' request to reargue a petition to open a default judgment in this mortgage foreclosure suit as they failed to file the necessary post-hearing motions required under Pennsylvania law and improperly sought to revive certain issues in their Rule 1925(b) statement. The court recommended affirmance.
Publication Date: 2022-03-21
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge McMaster
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0174
In this 1925(a) opinion, the court held husband had waived the issue of error in the denial of his motion to recuse because he failed to order a transcript of the hearing. Also, his claim of error lacked merit because husband requested the court to remain in the case to assist with settlement discussions. The court requested the appeal be quashed or denied.
Publication Date: 2022-01-10
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry: Pharmaceuticals | Retail
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Wecht
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0018
The lower court correctly applied the in pari delicto doctrine to grant the defendant pharmacy summary judgment in this negligence case since the decedent's death was caused, at least partially, by his own criminal conduct, i.e., possession and consumption of a controlled substance that was not prescribed to him. The high court affirmed.
Publication Date: 2022-01-03
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry: Health Care
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge Mellon
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-1424
The court reiterated its ruling in this Rule 1925(a) opinion that appellant failed to preserve her issues on appeal because she did not file a post-trial motion to remove defendant's compulsory non-suit. The court advised appellate court to quash the appeal.
Publication Date: 2021-12-27
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry: Real Estate
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Kennedy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-1399
The pro se defendants were not entitled to relief from the court's award where they failed to preserve any issues for appellate review through post-trial motions, failed to file a rule 1925(b) statement of matters complained of as directed and filed their notice of appeal more than 30 days after the entry of the subject order. The court recommended affirmance.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Jonathan H. Lomurro, Gary L. Riveles, Abbott S. Brown
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2021-11-29
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry: Financial Services and Banking
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
Judge: Judge Trauger
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-1308
The court dismissed as premature plaintiffs' appeal from an order granting one defendant summary judgment because the subject order was not final where it did not dispose of all claims and all parties and did not constitute an order appealable under any of the other applicable exceptions. The court recommended affirmance.
Publication Date: 2021-09-20
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Roberts
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-0945
All the issues raised in defendant/appellant's rule 1925(b) statement on appeal were waived where he failed to fully comply with the rule by filing his statement in a tardy manner. The court recommended affirmance of its order enforcing a settlement agreement.
Publication Date: 2021-09-13
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry: Construction
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Foglietta
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-0940
The court's order overruling defendants' preliminary objection was not appealable as it was not a final order, an order from which an interlocutory appeal could be taken as of right or with permission or a collateral order separable from and collateral to the main cause of action. The court recommended that defendants' appeal be quashed.
Publication Date: 2021-09-13
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Lazarus
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-1045
Trial court erred in granting judgment on the pleadings in civil forfeiture case where pleadings did not resolve material issues of the property's value or the owner's lack of consent to use of the forfeited property for criminal activity. Order of the trial court reversed, case remanded.
Publication Date: 2021-08-23
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry: Energy
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Dubow
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-0971
Court found pro se litigant's appeal was timely but his disregard for the rules of appellate procedure left the court without the ability to conduct effective review. Appeal dismissed.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read