Legal Opinion

Conte v. Hahnemann University Hospital

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 3, 1998PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

2Per curiam

Presently before the Court is appellee Hahnemann University Hospital’s (“Hahne-mann”) motion to quash the appeal filed by Tuae and Joseph Conte. After careful review, we grant Hahnemann’s motion and quash the appeal.

In this civil action, a jury verdict was returned in favor of defendant Hahnemann and against plaintiffs Tuae and Joseph Conte. On January 24, 1997, the Contes filed a motion for post-trial relief. The trial court did not act upon this motion, and on May 27,1997, Hahnemann filed a praecipe to enter judgment on the jury’s verdict pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 227.4(l)(b) and…

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Pittsburgh Construction Co. v. GriffithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  2. Armbruster v. HorowitzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  3. Jahanshahi v. Centura Development Co., Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  4. Freeman v. BonnerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  5. Gibbs v. HermanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998

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