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.
8 Pennsylvania opinions name it 7 courts 1929–1988 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 |
|---|---|---|
Curry v. Estate of Thompsongreen2 sentences1988See: Curry v. Estate of Thompson, 332 Pa.Super. 364, 366-367 , 481 A.2d 658, 659 (1984). 1988See: Curry v. Estate of Thompson, 332 Pa.Super. 364, 366-367 , 481 A.2d 658, 659 (1984). | 1 | 1 |
Trinity Universal Ins. v. General Accident, Fire & Life Assur. Corp.green2 sentences1983See Trinity Universal Insurance Co. v. General Accident, Fire & Life Assurance Corp., 138 Ohio St. 488 , 35 N.E. 2d 836 (1941). 1983See Trinity Universal Insurance Co. v. General Accident, Fire & Life Assurance Corp., 138 Ohio St. 488 , 35 N.E. 2d 836 (1941). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Matlackgreen1 sentence1977In Bull v. United States, 295 U.S. 247, 262 , 55 S.Ct. 695, 700 , 79 L.Ed. 1421 , it was said that “. recoupment is in the nature of a defense arising out of *306 some feature of the transaction upon which the plaintiff’s action is grounded” (Emphasis supplied by this Court in Com. v. Berks County.) And, while the right does not entitle the defendant to a certificate in its favor for the excess of its claim over the amount sued for by the Commonwealth, a general verdict for the defendant with respect to the sovereign’s claim is sustainable : See Commonwealth v. Matlack, supra.’ ” (Emphasis sup | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Scrivensgreen1 sentence1976And, while the right does not entitle the defendant to a certificate in its favor for the excess of its claim over the amount sued for by the Commonwealth, a general verdict for the defendant with respect to the sovereign’s claim is sustainable: see Commonwealth v. Matlack, supra.’ ” 448 Pa. at 76-79 , 292 A.2d at 315-317 . | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. ORSATTI, INC.green1 sentence1976And, while the right does not entitle the defendant to a certificate in its favor for the excess of its claim over the amount sued for by the Commonwealth, a general verdict for the defendant with respect to the sovereign’s claim is sustainable: see Commonwealth v. Matlack, supra.’ ” 448 Pa. at 76-79 , 292 A.2d at 315-317 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Transport Indemnity Company v. Home Indemnity Company
green
2 sentences1982Generally, when it is determined that two insurance policies cover the same risk and each contains an excess clause, the clauses are disregarded and the coverage provided is held to be concurrent: Transport Indemnity Company v. Home Indemnity Company, 535 F. 2d 232 (3rd Cir. 1976); Carriers Insurance Company v. American Policyholders’ Insurance Company, supra, at 220 , Annot., 69 A.L.R. 2d 1122 (1960). 1978The Third Circuit also resolved the issue of dueling excess clauses in Transport Indemnity Company v. Home Indemnity Company, 535 F. 2d 232 (3d Cir. 1976). | 2 | 1978–1982 |
Carolina Casualty Insurance v. Pennsylvania Threshermen & Farmers' Mutual Casualty Insurance
neutral
1 sentence1978Carolina Casualty Insurance Company v. Pennsylvania Threshermen & Farmers’ Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, 216 F. Supp. 325 (W.D. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Bull v. United States
green
2 sentences1977In Bull v. United States, 295 U.S. 247, 262 , 55 S.Ct. 695, 700 , 79 L.Ed. 1421 , it was said that “. recoupment is in the nature of a defense arising out of *306 some feature of the transaction upon which the plaintiff’s action is grounded” (Emphasis supplied by this Court in Com. v. Berks County.) And, while the right does not entitle the defendant to a certificate in its favor for the excess of its claim over the amount sued for by the Commonwealth, a general verdict for the defendant with respect to the sovereign’s claim is sustainable : See Commonwealth v. Matlack, supra.’ ” (Emphasis sup 1977In Bull v. United States, 295 U.S. 247, 262 , 55 S.Ct. 695, 700 , 79 L.Ed. 1421 , it was said that “. recoupment is in the nature of a defense arising out of *306 some feature of the transaction upon which the plaintiff’s action is grounded” (Emphasis supplied by this Court in Com. v. Berks County.) And, while the right does not entitle the defendant to a certificate in its favor for the excess of its claim over the amount sued for by the Commonwealth, a general verdict for the defendant with respect to the sovereign’s claim is sustainable : See Commonwealth v. Matlack, supra.’ ” (Emphasis sup | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Commonwealth v. Berks County
green
1 sentence1967A mere general verdict for defendant in respect of the sovereign’s claim is sustainable : Commonwealth v. Berks County, 364 Pa. 447 . | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Collins v. Collins
green
1 sentence1929While so much of the opinion in that case as refers to the right of a plaintiff to remit part of the principal of his claim in order to bring it within the jurisdiction of a justice has been departed from in later cases (Stroh v. Uhrich, 1 W. & S. 57 ; Collins v. Collins, 37 Pa. 387 ; Bower v. McCormick, 73 Pa. 427 ), the right of the plaintiff to waive interest is still recognized, (Evans v. Hall, 45 Pa. 235 ; Ballingall v. Kite, 41 Pa. Superior Ct. 428 ), and the action of the court in permitting the judgment to be reduced, if restricted to a waiver of interest, has not been overruled. | 1 | 1929–1929 |
Evans v. Hall
neutral
1 sentence1929While so much of the opinion in that case as refers to the right of a plaintiff to remit part of the principal of his claim in order to bring it within the jurisdiction of a justice has been departed from in later cases (Stroh v. Uhrich, 1 W. & S. 57 ; Collins v. Collins, 37 Pa. 387 ; Bower v. McCormick, 73 Pa. 427 ), the right of the plaintiff to waive interest is still recognized, (Evans v. Hall, 45 Pa. 235 ; Ballingall v. Kite, 41 Pa. Superior Ct. 428 ), and the action of the court in permitting the judgment to be reduced, if restricted to a waiver of interest, has not been overruled. | 1 | 1929–1929 |
Bower v. McCormick
green
1 sentence1929While so much of the opinion in that case as refers to the right of a plaintiff to remit part of the principal of his claim in order to bring it within the jurisdiction of a justice has been departed from in later cases (Stroh v. Uhrich, 1 W. & S. 57 ; Collins v. Collins, 37 Pa. 387 ; Bower v. McCormick, 73 Pa. 427 ), the right of the plaintiff to waive interest is still recognized, (Evans v. Hall, 45 Pa. 235 ; Ballingall v. Kite, 41 Pa. Superior Ct. 428 ), and the action of the court in permitting the judgment to be reduced, if restricted to a waiver of interest, has not been overruled. | 1 | 1929–1929 |
Ballingall v. Kite
green
1 sentence1929While so much of the opinion in that case as refers to the right of a plaintiff to remit part of the principal of his claim in order to bring it within the jurisdiction of a justice has been departed from in later cases (Stroh v. Uhrich, 1 W. & S. 57 ; Collins v. Collins, 37 Pa. 387 ; Bower v. McCormick, 73 Pa. 427 ), the right of the plaintiff to waive interest is still recognized, (Evans v. Hall, 45 Pa. 235 ; Ballingall v. Kite, 41 Pa. Superior Ct. 428 ), and the action of the court in permitting the judgment to be reduced, if restricted to a waiver of interest, has not been overruled. | 1 | 1929–1929 |
Stroh v. Uhrich
green
1 sentence1929While so much of the opinion in that case as refers to the right of a plaintiff to remit part of the principal of his claim in order to bring it within the jurisdiction of a justice has been departed from in later cases (Stroh v. Uhrich, 1 W. & S. 57 ; Collins v. Collins, 37 Pa. 387 ; Bower v. McCormick, 73 Pa. 427 ), the right of the plaintiff to waive interest is still recognized, (Evans v. Hall, 45 Pa. 235 ; Ballingall v. Kite, 41 Pa. Superior Ct. 428 ), and the action of the court in permitting the judgment to be reduced, if restricted to a waiver of interest, has not been overruled. | 1 | 1929–1929 |
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.