Legal Opinion
Laudenberger v. Port Auth. of Allegheny
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided October 29, 1981No. 80-1-160PublishedCited by 290 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
O’BRIEN, Chief Justice.
Today we are called upon to determine the constitutionality of Pa.R.C.P. 238, promulgated by this Court pursuant to our constitutional rule-making authority. Rule 238 pertains to prejudgment interest granted in certain instances to plaintiffs who receive jury verdicts in excess of any settlement offer made by a defendant prior to trial. The trial court in the instant case held this rule to be unconstitutional and refused to remold the verdict in accordance with Rule 238.
This rule is attacked from several directions. The authority of the Supreme Court…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Hanna v. PlumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Reed v. ReedSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Vance v. BradleySupreme Court of the United States · 1979
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by290 opinions
- Monessen Southwestern Railway Co. v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Commonwealth v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- Craig v. Magee Memorial Rehabilitation CenterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Muhammad v. Strassburger, McKenna, Messer, Shilobod & GutnickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Curtis v. KlineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
285 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.