Legal Opinion

Pentarek v. Christy

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 14, 2004PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

JOHNSON, J.:

¶ 1 In this appeal, Plaintiffs Matthew G. Pentarek and Connie Pentarek, his Wife, appeal a judgment entered in favor of the defendant on May 28, 2003, under authority of Civil Rule 227.4. Defendant Gregory A. Christy cross-appeals from an order entered by the trial court on June 3, 2003, purporting to grant a new trial in favor of the Pentareks. We determine, in accordance with Rule 227.4, that the trial court’s June 3 order was a legal nullity and that *972the verdict of the jury was properly reduced to judgment on May 28, 2003. We conclude also that given the substantially…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Pittsburgh Construction Co. v. GriffithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  2. Neison v. HinesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  3. Gorski v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  4. Davis v. MullenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  5. Armbruster v. HorowitzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Kanter v. EpsteinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  2. Angelo v. DiamontoniSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  3. Elliott v. IontaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  4. Dietrich v. DietrichSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  5. Bryan v. Moxley, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County2005

4 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