Legal Opinion

Dorsett v. Hughes

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 14, 1986No. 02796PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Per curiam

The undisputed facts in the case before us are that Emil Harman died on June 22, 1982, leaving a last will and testament in which he named the appellants, Charles H. Dorsett and Charles H. Dorsett, Jr. who are attorneys, as executors of the estate. The deceased also named Frances Newman Hughes and her husband, Harry G. Hughes, as executors. The will was drawn by Charles H. Dorsett, the father of Charles H. Dorsett, Jr. Although both Mr. Dorsetts are lawyers licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania, they are not associated in the practice of law and maintain separate offices.

After Mr. Harman…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Thompson Coal Co. v. Pike Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  2. Thorsen v. Iron and Glass BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. LaRocca EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  4. Ballou v. State Ethics CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. Acker v. PalenaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Styer v. HugoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  2. Wrenfield Homeowners Ass'n v. DeYoungSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  3. Kenis v. Perini Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  4. Mager v. BultenaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  5. Hiscott and Robinson v. KingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993

20 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