Legal Opinion

Staiano v. Johns-Manville Corp.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 3, 1982No. 1466PublishedCited by 65 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SPAETH, Judge:

This is an appeal from an order entering summary judgment. The question is whether the lower court erred in finding appellants’ claims barred by the statute of limitations. We have concluded that the court did not err, and therefore affirm.

Appellants’ action is in trespass and assumpsit and is in four counts: negligence, breach of warranty, strict liability, fraud and conspiracy. Appellant-husband asks damages for personal injuries sustained as a result of occupational exposure to asbestos dust emanating from products manufactured by appellees, and appellant-wife asks damages…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  2. Dilliplaine v. Lehigh Valley Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  3. Clarence Borel v. Fibreboard Paper Products Corporation, Nationalsurety Corporation, Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
  4. Schmidt v. Merchants Despatch Transportation Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1936
  5. Smith v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959

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

3Cited by65 opinions

  1. Cathcart v. Keene Industrial InsulationSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  2. O'Stricker v. Jim Walter Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Burnside v. Abbott LaboratoriesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  4. Pierce v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1983
  5. Krentz v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006

60 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