Legal Opinion

Botkin v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 30, 2006PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

POPOVICH, J.:

¶ 1 Appellant Barbara Botkin, guardian ad litem for Gay Banes, an incapacitated person, appeals the order granting summary judgment in favor of Appellees Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (hereinafter “MetLife”), Joel Sherman, and Ted Stavrakis on the basis that the trial court erred in: 1) failing to equate answers to interrogatories to deposition testimony; and 2) treating Banes’ letters, his daughter/Appellant Botkin’s remarks, and his expert’s memorandum as hearsay evidence subject to exclusion at trial. 1 We affirm.

The standards which govern summary judgment are…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Stidham v. Millvale Sportsmen's ClubSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  2. Swords v. Harleysville Insurance CompaniesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  3. McCain v. PennbankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  4. Ball v. MinnickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  5. Treharne v. CallahanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Phillips v. SeligSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  2. Petrina v. Allied Glove Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  3. Bezjak, J. v. Diamond, M.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  4. Turner v. Valley Housing Development Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  5. Dimino v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Monroe County2007

8 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