National Recovery Systems v. Perlman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1DissentOlszewski, Judge
I am in total agreement with the majority in calling for a re-examination of the collateral order doctrine. On the facts of this case, however, I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the order denying the motion to enforce the settlement agreement was not appealable.
It is well settled that an appeal will lie only from a final order unless otherwise permitted by statute. Fried v. Fried, 509 Pa. 89, 93, 501 A.2d 211, 213 (1985); Pugar v. Greco, 483 Pa. 678, 72, 394 A.2d 542, 544 (1978). “A final order is one which usually ends the litigation, or alternatively, disposes of the entire…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Carson v. American Brands, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Pugar v. GrecoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Bell v. Beneficial Consumer Discount Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Teodore Dorotee Autera v. Manuel Dudley Robinson, Anthony C. Autera v. Manuel Dudley RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1969
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.