Legal Opinion

Lineberger v. Wyeth

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 23, 2006PublishedCited by 174 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

GANTMAN, J.:

¶ 1 Appellant, Patricia R. Lineberger, asks us to determine whether the trial court erred when it granted summary judgment in favor of Appellee, Wyeth f/k/a American Home Products Corporation, Wyeth-Ayerst Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, Division of American Home Products Corporation (‘Wyeth”), and dismissed all of Appellant’s claims with prejudice. We hold Appellant waived her issues on appeal, because her court-ordered Rule 1925(b) concise statement of matters complained of on appeal was vague and overly broad. Appellant also waived the Nanty-Glo1…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. LordSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  2. Nanty-Glo Boro. v. American Surety Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  3. Incollingo v. EwingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  4. Commonwealth v. DowlingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  5. Kaczkowski v. BolubaszSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980

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

3Cited by174 opinions

  1. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. MurraySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  2. Commonwealth v. ReevesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  3. Hess v. Fox Rothschild, LLPSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  4. Krentz v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  5. DeArmitt v. New York Life InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013

169 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