Legal Opinion

Gallo v. Yamaha Motor Corp., USA

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 9, 1984No. 1010PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OLSZEWSKI, Judge:

This appeal follows denial of appellants’ motion to amend their answer in an action initiated by Concetta Gallo. For the reasons below, we vacate the order and remand the case to allow the requested amendment.

Concetta Gallo suffered injuries in a collision involving a snowmobile on which she was a passenger. She sued Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S.A. (hereinafter “Yamaha”) as distributor of the snowmobile, Bruce Ott as owner and operator of the snowmobile, and Steven J. Polansky as owner and operator of an automobile with which the snowmobile collided, and Pocono West, Inc.,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bata v. Central-Penn National BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  2. Tanner v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Ecksel v. Orleans Construction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  2. Capobianchi v. Bic Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  3. Horowitz v. Universal Underwriters InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  4. Gallo v. Yamaha Motor Corp., USASupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  5. Barr v. General Accident Group Insurance Co. of North AmericaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987

30 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