Beneficial Consumer Discount v. Dailey
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
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
- Lorah ex rel. Evans v. NissleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Appeal of HackerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Collins v. Tracy Grill & Bar Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Swaney v. Georges Township Road DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Klein v. ReidSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
3Cited by18 opinions
- Osprey Portfolio, LLC v. IzettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- In Re KristiniakUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
- David Cutler Industries, Ltd. v. Bank of America (In re David Cutler Industries, Ltd.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2013
- Driscoll, R. v. Arena, J.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- In Re Estate of SnyderSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.