Legal Opinion

Cummins v. Rosa

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 22, 2004PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

POPOVICH, J.:

¶ 1 Martha Cummins (Wife) and Harry H. Cummins, Jr. (Husband) (collectively Appellants) appeal the judgment entered in favor of Appellees Deborah M. Rosa, M.D., and Wasfy F. Fahmy, M.D., on April 15, 2003, in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County. On appeal, Appellants contend that the trial court committed reversible error when it failed to rule inadmissible certain expert testimony presented by Appellees pursuant to Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir.1923), and its Pennsylvania equivalent, Commonwealth v. Topa, 471 Pa. 223, 369 A.2d 1277 (1977).…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
  2. Commonwealth v. TopaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Blum v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  4. Tucker v. Community Medical CenterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  5. McNeal v. Eaton Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Stange, T. v. Janssen PharmaceuticalsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  2. Walsh, R. v. BASF CorporationSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  3. Carroll v. AvalloneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  4. In the Interest of J.F.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  5. Burnley, D. v. Loews HotelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2026

8 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