Legal Opinion
Kelly-Springfield Tire Co. v. D'AMBRO
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided September 6, 1991PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WIEAND, Judge:
This appeal requires that we review the averments of an amended complaint to determine whether they are sufficient to state causes of action against a lawyer for wrongful use of civil process and intentional interference with a prospective contractual relationship.1 After careful review, we conclude that causes of action have been adequately stated; and, therefore, we reverse the order of the trial court which sustained preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer. *304Creeger Brick v. Mid-State Bank, 385 Pa.Super. 30, 32-33, 560 A.2d 151, 152 (1989).
*303A preliminary objection in…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Thompson Coal Co. v. Pike Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Adler, Barish, Daniels, Levin & Creskoff v. EpsteinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- GLENN v. Point Park CollegeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
- Creeger Brick & Building Supply Inc. v. Mid-State Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- United States National Bank v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Werner v. Plater-ZyberkSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Landstrom v. ShaverSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
- Hart v. O'MALLEYSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Alpart v. General Land Partners, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2008
- Walnut Street Associates, Inc. v. Brokerage Concepts, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.