Legal Opinion

Namie v. DiGIROLAMO

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 27, 1963No. Appeal, 202PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mb. Justice Robebts,

Belgrade Shoe Company, a non-registered foreign corporation, appeals from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County dismissing its preliminary objections which raised the question of jurisdiction over the person. Service of process was made upon the Secretary of the Commonwealth pursuant to the Act of May 5, 1933, P. L. 364, §1011, as amended, 15 P.S. §2852-1011 (Supp. 1962). 1

The “acts or omissions” of Belgrade are alleged to have arisen out of an automobile collision between Lillian Namie and Henry T. DiGirolamo on May 27, 1960, at the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Feller v. New Amsterdam Cas. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
  2. Rufo v. the Bastian-Blessing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  3. Feller v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  4. JOHNSON v. ANGRETTISupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  5. Stepp v. RennSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1957

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Drexel v. Union Prescription Centers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
  2. Wenzel v. Morris Distributing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  3. Miller v. Kiamesha-Concord, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  4. George v. NemethSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  5. Cecere v. Ohringer Home Furniture Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1966

15 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