Legal Opinion

Francis Gerard Janson, P.C. v. Frost

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 5, 1993No. 908PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

POPOVICH, Judge:

The appellant, Francis Gerard Janson, P.C., has filed an appeal from the order granting the preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer of the appellees, Mark B. Frost & Mark B. Frost, Joseph Demesquita & R. Lee Rudow, individually and a partnership, trading as Frost, Demesquita & Rudow. We affirm.

When reviewing preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer, the question is whether, assuming the facts averred in the complaint to be true, the law is clear that no recovery is permitted. A demurrer admits every well-pleaded fact and all inferences reasonably deducible…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Waterman v. BanksSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Recht v. Clairton Urban Redevelopment AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  3. Slater v. Pearle Vision Center, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  4. Walton v. Philadelphia National BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  5. Sundheim v. Beaver County Building & Loan Ass'nSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Corestates Bank, N.A. v. CutilloSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  2. McDermott v. Party City Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1998
  3. First Home Savings Bank, FSB v. NernbergSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  4. Com. v. Roncase, W.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020
  5. Knorr v. Knorr, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Columbia County2005

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API