Legal Opinion
Lane v. Schacht
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided November 3, 1978No. 588 and 589PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PRICE, Judge:
These appeals arise from an order of the lower court granting the motion for summary judgment on behalf of M & M Transportation Company (M & M) and denying the summary judgment motions of appellants Harold Schacht (Schacht) and Quakertown Transport Company, Incorporated (Quakertown). We hold the entry of summary judgment on behalf of M & M to be in error, and that the order denying the summary judgment motions of Schacht and Quakertown to be an interlocutory order and not appealable to this court. The facts giving rise to this dispute are as follows.
On September 18, 1974, at…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bell v. Beneficial Consumer Discount Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Betty v. Pace, as Administratrix of the Estate of Floyd J. Pace, Jr., Deceased v. Southern Express CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1969
- Husak v. Berkel, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Mature v. AngeloSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
- Siidekum v. Animal Rescue League of PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Ortiz v. Ra-El Development Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Johnson v. HarrisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Manuel v. Fort Collins Newspapers, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1981
- Keating v. ZemelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Reifinger v. Holiday Inns, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.