Legal Opinion · Dissent

Provident Credit Corp. v. Young

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 14, 1982No. 1679Published

1DissentCavanaugh, Judge

I dissent because, in my view, the majority has ignored the applicable law. The only issue before this court is *132whether the court below abused its discretion in refusing to open a judgment entered by default. The grant of a petition to open judgment is a matter of judicial discretion and an appeal to the court’s equitable powers. The discretion is to be exercised only when three factors coalesce: (1) The petition has been promptly filed; (2) a meritious defense can be shown and (3) the failure to appear can be excused. Balk v. Ford Motor Company, 446 Pa. 137, 258 A.2d 128 (1971). Further, a…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Mielcuszny Et Ux. v. Rosol (Et Ux.)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  2. BALK v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  3. Kraynick v. HERTZSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  4. Pappas v. StefanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  5. Garrett's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939

24 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