Legal Opinion

Steiner by Steiner v. Bell Tele. Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 18, 1986No. 457PublishedCited by 49 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

ROWLEY, Judge:

The sole issue raised in this appeal is whether Pennsylvania should recognize a cause of action by a child for loss of parental consortium when the parent is injured by a third-party tort-feasor’s negligence. For the reasons set forth herein, we affirm the order of the trial court and refuse to recognize such a cause of action.

On December 29, 1981, the two minor appellants 1 were at home with their mother when someone broke into the house. Hearing the intruder’s footsteps, the appellants’ mother dialed the Bell Telephone Company’s directory assistance number…

2Cases cited49 opinions

  1. Griffith v. United Air Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  2. Sinn v. BurdSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  3. Niederman v. BrodskySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  4. Cathcart v. Keene Industrial InsulationSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  5. Ferriter v. Daniel O'Connell's Sons, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980

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

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. Mendillo v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
  2. Villareal v. State, Dept. of Transp.Arizona Supreme Court · 1989
  3. City of Philadelphia v. Lead Industries Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
  4. High v. HowardOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Walton v. Avco Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

44 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