Legal Opinion
Wicker v. Esposito
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided January 6, 1983No. 8 E.D. Allocatur Docket 1983PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
2Per curiam
And now to wit this 24th day of March, 1983, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is granted.
Having reviewed the record, we are satisfied that the right party was sued under a wrong designation. Thus, the permission of amendment in this case does not constitute the substituting of another and distinct party after the statute of limitations has run. Paulish v. Bakaitis, 442 Pa. 434, 275 A.2d 318 (1971).
Accordingly, the order of the Superior Court,-Pa. Super. -, 454 A.2d 160, affirming the order of the Court of Common Pleas is reversed. The matter is remanded to the trial court with…
3Cases cited1 opinion
- Paulish v. BakaitisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
4Cited by23 opinions
- In re Activision Blizzard, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Hall v. ACME MARKETS, INC.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Tork-Hiis v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
- Jacob's Air Conditioning & Heating v. Associated Heating & Air ConditioningSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Ferraro v. McCarthy-PascuzzoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.