Legal Opinion

Beneficial Consumer Discount v. Dailey

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 29, 1994No. 1938PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OLSZEWSKI, Judge:

There is one question presented here: Did the Daileys sign a contact under seal when they took a loan from Beneficial? If they did, Beneficial’s action to enforce the agreement was timely. If they did not, the action is barred by the statute of limitations. We find that they signed a contract under seal and affirm the trial court.

The Daileys borrowed $2,880.00 from Beneficial in 1985. When they signed the loan agreement — a pre-printed form used by Beneficial in all consumer loan transactions — the word “SEAL” was pre-printed to the right of their names. The Daileys defaulted…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lorah ex rel. Evans v. NissleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
  2. Appeal of HackerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
  3. Collins v. Tracy Grill & Bar Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  4. Swaney v. Georges Township Road DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  5. Klein v. ReidSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Osprey Portfolio, LLC v. IzettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  2. In Re KristiniakUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
  3. David Cutler Industries, Ltd. v. Bank of America (In re David Cutler Industries, Ltd.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2013
  4. Driscoll, R. v. Arena, J.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
  5. In Re Estate of SnyderSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011

13 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