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.
10 Pennsylvania opinions name it 4 courts 1931–2023 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
DiAndrea v. Reliance Savings & Loan Ass'ngreen1 sentence2023DiAndrea v. Reliance Savings & Loan Association, 456 A.2d 1066, 1069 (Pa. Super. 1983) “A motion for judgment on the pleadings is in the nature of a demurrer in which all of the nonmovant’s well-pleaded allegations are viewed as true, but only those facts specifically admitted by the nonmovant may be considered against him.” Kerr, 614 A.2d at 339 . | 1 | 1 |
Adamski v. Allstate Insurance Co.green1 sentence2007For purposes of an action against an insurer for failure to pay a claim, such conduct imports a dishonest purpose and means breach of a known duty (i.e., good faith and fair dealing), through some motive of self-interest or ill will; mere negligence or bad judgment is not bad faith.” Adamski v. Allstate Insurance Company, 738 A.2d 1033, 1036 (Pa. Super. 1999). (citations omitted) The available relief for a bad faith claim is provided in 42 Pa.C.S. §8371. 1 At the preliminary objections stage of the pleadings and under the standard for evaluating a demurrer to the plaintiffs’ complaint, we find | 1 | 1 |
State Camp of Penna. of Patriotic Sons of America v. Kelleygreen1 sentence1931See State C. of Pa. P. S. of A. v. Kelley, 267 Pa. 49 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Kerr v. Borough of Union City
green
1 sentence2023DiAndrea v. Reliance Savings & Loan Association, 456 A.2d 1066, 1069 (Pa. Super. 1983) “A motion for judgment on the pleadings is in the nature of a demurrer in which all of the nonmovant’s well-pleaded allegations are viewed as true, but only those facts specifically admitted by the nonmovant may be considered against him.” Kerr, 614 A.2d at 339 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Gorman v. Jacobs
green
1 sentence2019Following its review of the pleadings and a hearing on Appellees’ Preliminary Objections, the trial court, analogizing this case to Gorman, supra, concluded that Appellant failed to meet its burden to prove that Appellees evinced the intent to interact with Pennsylvania through their internet activity.6 In particular, the court found that Appellant had not satisfied the third prong of the Calder “Effects Test,” i.e., that Appellees tortious activity was “expressly aimed” at Pennsylvania. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Raneri v. DePOLO
green
1 sentence2018See Joseph, supra; Raneri, supra. Further, his general averment that Ms. Pray’s “charges” resulted in “publicity” and “negative attention in or from the news media” does not set forth a prima facie case of defamation. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Hess v. Merion Title & Trust Co. of Ardmore
green
2 sentences1994In Hess v. Merion Title & Trust Co. of Ardmore, 317 Pa. 501 , 177 A. 53 (1935), the Supreme Court held that the plaintiffs filing of a reply to the defendant’s new matter prior to filing a motion for judgment on the pleadings was not a waiver of the plaintiffs right to request such judgment in view of a statute requiring the filing of a reply to new matter under penalty of being deemed to have admitted the averments in the new matter. 3 The September 29, 1993 letter from the chief administrative judge of the Board specifically directed PIHS to file a response to Department’s new matter and cou 1994In Hess v. Merion Title & Trust Co. of Ardmore, 317 Pa. 501 , 177 A. 53 (1935), the Supreme Court held that the plaintiffs filing of a reply to the defendant’s new matter prior to filing a motion for judgment on the pleadings was not a waiver of the plaintiffs right to request such judgment in view of a statute requiring the filing of a reply to new matter under penalty of being deemed to have admitted the averments in the new matter. 3 The September 29, 1993 letter from the chief administrative judge of the Board specifically directed PIHS to file a response to Department’s new matter and cou | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Davis Cookie Co., Inc. v. Wasley
green
1 sentence1992Davis Cookie Co. Inc. v. Wasley, supra, 389 Pa. Super, at 121, 566 A.2d at 874 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
VENNERI v. COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY
green
2 sentences1980While it is true that a court cannot enter peremptory judgment where there are substantial issues of fact, Venneri v. County of Allegheny, 5 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 105 , 289 A.2d 523 (1972), the judge here correctly found, after the evidentiary hearing, that there remained no substantially disputed issue of facts. 1980While it is true that a court cannot enter peremptory judgment where there are substantial issues of fact, Venneri v. County of Allegheny, 5 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 105 , 289 A.2d 523 (1972), the judge here correctly found, after the evidentiary hearing, that there remained no substantially disputed issue of facts. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Ruhe v. Kroger Co.
green
2 sentences1975See Goldman v. McShain, supra; Ruhe v. Kroger Co., 425 Pa. 213 , 228 A.2d 750 (1967) ; Pisiechko v. Diaddorio, supra; Chivers, Jr. v. School Dist. of Mt. 1975See Goldman v. McShain, supra; Ruhe v. Kroger Co., 425 Pa. 213 , 228 A.2d 750 (1967) ; Pisiechko v. Diaddorio, supra; Chivers, Jr. v. School Dist. of Mt. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Conrad v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences1974The principal authority cited by the defendants is Conrad v. Commonwealth, Department of Highways, 441 Pa. 530 , 272 A. 2d 470 (1971). 1974The principal authority cited by the defendants is Conrad v. Commonwealth, Department of Highways, 441 Pa. 530 , 272 A. 2d 470 (1971). | 1 | 1974–1974 |
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.