Legal Opinion

Anderson Equipment Co. v. Huchber

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 18, 1997PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HESTER, Judge.

Anderson Equipment Company appeals by permission from an interlocutory order. Appellant challenges its joinder as a defendant after the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. Appellant was substituted in place of the originally-named defendant, “John Doe 1.” Since that amendment was improper, we are constrained to reverse and dismiss appellant from this action.

Appellee, 1 Shirley Huchber, individually and in her capacity as administratrix of the estate of Thomas J. Huchber, instituted this action on April 7, 1993, by writ of summons. Named as defendants were Lake…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Lamp v. HeymanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  2. Thompson v. PeckSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  3. Powell v. SutliffSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  4. Cianchetti v. KaylenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  5. Hoare v. BELL TELEPHONE CO. OF PENN.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Estate of Considine v. Wachovia BankSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  2. Weiley v. Albert Einstein Medical CenterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  3. Ferraro v. McCarthy-PascuzzoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  4. Zane v. Friends HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  5. Commonwealth v. LaventureSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006

15 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