Semenza v. Alfano
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Concurrence
Concurring Opinion by
Mr. Justice Jones :
I concur in order to amplify the majority’s statute of frauds discussion and to consider an analogous issue not addressed by the majority. In my view, the majority should discuss not only the statute of frauds provision concerning an interest in land but also that section requiring that agreements made upon consideration of marriage be in writing. Moreover, although related to the first statute of frauds issue, problems with the parol evidence rule merit discussion.
Quite candidly, my comments on that section of the statute of frauds requiring agreements…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Shapiro v. ShapiroSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
- Chambers v. ChambersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
- Lapayowker v. Lincoln College Preparatory SchoolSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Christy v. ChristySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- Katz v. KatzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.