Legal Opinion

McDermott v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 20, 2001No. Petition No. 153 EAL 2001PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

2Per curiam

AND NOW, this 20th day of December, 2001, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is hereby GRANTED. Furthermore, the order of the Superior Court is VACATED and the matter is REMANDED for reconsideration. On remand, the Superi- or Court is specifically directed to consider this court’s decision in Davis v. Mullen, 565 Pa. 386, 773 A.2d 764 (2001).

Furthermore, we note that the Superior Court, relying on Dale v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., 359 Pa.Super. 477, 519 A.2d 450 (1986), incorrectly stated that Petitioner is liable *562for the entire amount of the damages regardless of whether…

3Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Davis v. MullenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  2. Dale v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  3. Dale v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986

4Cited by4 opinions

  1. Nunemacher v. Sensinger, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Carbon County2005
  2. Rasieleski v. Connor, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lackawanna County2002
  3. Zeigler v. DetweilerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  4. Zeigler v. DetweilerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API