Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 Pennsylvania opinions name it 6 courts 1900–2011 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Co. v. Blackgreen1 sentence2011Id. at 572-573. | 1 | 1 |
Geisler v. Motorists Mutual Insurancegreen1 sentence1991See Geisler, supra, 382 Pa. Super, at 633, 556 A.2d at 397 .” Implicit in that analysis by the court is the determination by the court that the set-off clause may be enforced despite the insured’s claim that to do so would be against the public policy of the Commonwealth. | 1 | 1 |
Wolgemuth v. Harleysville Mutual Insurancegreen2 sentences1991See also, Wolgemuth v. Harleysville Mutual Insurance Company, 370 Pa. Super. 51, 535 A.2d 1145 (1988). 1991See also, Wolgemuth v. Harleysville Mutual Insurance Company, 370 Pa. Super. 51, 535 A.2d 1145 (1988). | 1 | 1 |
United States Building & Loan Assn' v. Silvermangreen1 sentence1938This was decided in U. S. Building & Loan Assn. v. Silverman, 85 Pa. 394, 396, 397 , where Mr. Justice Gordon, speaking for the *385 Court said: “Had the affidavit of defense filed in this case set forth losses incurred by the association, whether resulting from the depreciation of its property or otherwise, occurring before the time of the plaintiff’s withdrawal, no doubt a proper set-off to the claim in suit would have been exhibited; herein, however, is the material defect in that it does not state that such losses did happen before the withdrawal. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re Joint E. & S. Dist. Asbestos Litigation
green
1 sentence1999Findley, supra, at 494 . [13] The TDP permits contribution claims by co-defendants against the Trust only where the underlying claim has not been liquidated, or where the trial court has not permitted a set-off claim. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Sparler v. Fireman's Insurance Co. of Newark
green
2 sentences1993Sparler, supra at 606-7 , 521 A.2d at 437 . 1993Sparler, supra at 606-7 , 521 A.2d at 437 . | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Brader v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance
green
2 sentences1988Specifically, the estate relies upon Brader v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, 270 Pa. Super. 258 , 411 A.2d 516 (1979), where the Pennsylvania Superior Court declared a similar set-off clause, invoked to deny the insured uninsured motorist benefits, void as contrary to the legislative in tent of the act. 1988Specifically, the estate relies upon Brader v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, 270 Pa. Super. 258 , 411 A.2d 516 (1979), where the Pennsylvania Superior Court declared a similar set-off clause, invoked to deny the insured uninsured motorist benefits, void as contrary to the legislative in tent of the act. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Francis v. Corleto
green
2 sentences1985Francis v. Corleto, 418 Pa. 417 , 211 A.2d 503 (1965). 1985Francis v. Corleto, 418 Pa. 417 , 211 A.2d 503 (1965). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
McKoy v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
green
2 sentences1980As another means of analyzing the issue, the structure of the policy and the arrangement of its various clauses can determine the intent of the set-off clause: McKoy v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., Inc., 281 Md. 26 , 374 A. 2d 1170 (1977). 1980As another means of analyzing the issue, the structure of the policy and the arrangement of its various clauses can determine the intent of the set-off clause: McKoy v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., Inc., 281 Md. 26 , 374 A. 2d 1170 (1977). | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Langston v. Allstate Insurance
green
1 sentence1980Examining the within policy’s “LIMIT OF LIABILITY” section, there is no indication that the paragraph beginning “Any amounts otherwise payable” is subordinated in any way to the paragraph beginning “The hmit of liability.. . .’’Each clause stands on equal footing, and each can be viewed as independently modifying the very first paragraph of PartC, beginning, “We will pay damages. . . .” See McKoy v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., Inc., supra; Langston v. Allstate Insurance Co., 40 Md. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Hilbish v. Hower
neutral
1 sentence1935This claim of course could not be sustained; defendant, as justice of the peace, not a tax collector, had no authority to issue such warrants: Hilbish v. Hower, 58 Pa. 93 ; Ross v. Hudson, 6 Pa. Superior Ct. 552 . | 1 | 1935–1935 |
Ross v. Hudson
neutral
1 sentence1935This claim of course could not be sustained; defendant, as justice of the peace, not a tax collector, had no authority to issue such warrants: Hilbish v. Hower, 58 Pa. 93 ; Ross v. Hudson, 6 Pa. Superior Ct. 552 . | 1 | 1935–1935 |
Walden v. Berry
neutral
1 sentence1928The set-off was no defense therefore before the magistrate nor would it be available for that purpose on the appeal: Walden v. Berry, 48 Pa. 456 ; Deihm v. Snell, 119 Pa. 316 . | 1 | 1928–1928 |
Deihm v. Snell
green
1 sentence1928The set-off was no defense therefore before the magistrate nor would it be available for that purpose on the appeal: Walden v. Berry, 48 Pa. 456 ; Deihm v. Snell, 119 Pa. 316 . | 1 | 1928–1928 |
Uhler v. Sanderson
neutral
1 sentence1900The facts averred did not involve the doctrine of set-off ; they directly attacked the plaintiff’s right to recover, and to entitle the defendant to offer them in evidence upon the trial the proper plea would have been nonassumpsit: Heck v. Shener, 4 S. & R. 248, 258; Hunt v. Gilmore, 59 Pa. 450 ; Uhler v. Sanderson, 38 Pa. 128 ; Glennon v. Lebanon Mfg. | 1 | 1900–1900 |
Hunt v. Gilmore
green
1 sentence1900The facts averred did not involve the doctrine of set-off ; they directly attacked the plaintiff’s right to recover, and to entitle the defendant to offer them in evidence upon the trial the proper plea would have been nonassumpsit: Heck v. Shener, 4 S. & R. 248, 258; Hunt v. Gilmore, 59 Pa. 450 ; Uhler v. Sanderson, 38 Pa. 128 ; Glennon v. Lebanon Mfg. | 1 | 1900–1900 |
Glennon v. Lebanon Mfg. Co.
neutral
1 sentence1900Co. 140 Pa. 594 ; Watson v. Philadelphia, 142 Pa. 179 . | 1 | 1900–1900 |
Watson v. City of Philadelphia
neutral
1 sentence1900Co. 140 Pa. 594 ; Watson v. Philadelphia, 142 Pa. 179 . | 1 | 1900–1900 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.