Bishoff v. Fehl
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Parker,
This appeal, which is from an order striking off the plaintiff’s second supplemental amendment to statement of claim, amended reply to counterclaim and plaintiff’s accounts, must be quashed. The order complained of did not finally dispose of the action. (Com. ex rel. v. Wherry, 302 Pa. 134, 152 A. 846) and no judgment has been entered : Leibfried v. Horn, 294 Pa. 137, 143 A. 786; Smith v. Phila. & R. Ry., 286 Pa. 55, 132 A. 804; McClelland v. West Penn Apl. Co., 132 Pa. Superior Ct. 471, A. 2d 491.
It seems advisable, in order that a mistrial may be avoided, to…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Blanchard v. . BlanchardNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
- Heaney v. RiddleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Faulkner v. McHenrySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Miners State Bank v. AuksztokalnisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Thayer v. DanielsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Village of Crainville v. Argonaut InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1980
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. United Penn BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- United States v. TilleraasDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1981
- Etter v. Industrial Valley Bank & Trust Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- United States v. WilsonDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1979
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.