Parr v. Roman
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the CourtKlein, J.
¶ 1 Plaintiffs appeal from the Order granting Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. We reverse.
¶2 Plaintiffs (collectively referred to as the “Parrs”) filed a summons one day before the statute of limitations expired on a personal injury action for damages sustained in a rear-end automobile collision, allegedly caused by Defendant, Michelle Roman. The docket entries contained in the official record reflect several unsuccessful attempts made to effectuate service on the defendant. The writ had lapsed twice, and was subsequently renewed, before service was achieved on March 20,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lamp v. HeymanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
- Farinacci v. Beaver County Industrial Development AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Heritage Surveyors & Engineers, Inc. v. National Penn BankSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Witherspoon v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
3Cited by11 opinions
- Sheets v. Liberty Homes, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Miller v. KlinkCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Sardo v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
- Feehan, J. v. Allstate Insurance CompanySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
- Hoberg v. Smith, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County2005
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.