Legal Opinion

Huegel v. Mifflin Construction Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 3, 2002PublishedCited by 53 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBender, J.

¶ 1 Mifflin Construction Co., Inc. (Miff-lin) and Conseco Finance Co. (Conseco) (hereinafter jointly addressed as Appellants), defendants in the action below, appeal from the trial court’s order dismissing their preliminary objections, which sought an order to compel the plaintiffs, Diana Huegel and George Huegel (Huegels), wife and husband, to submit their claims to arbitration. Appellants argue that the trial court erred in determining that the arbitration clause contained in the Home Improvement & Installment Contract and Truth in Lending Disclosure did not apply to the claims asserted in…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Smith v. Cumberland Group, Ltd.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  2. Midomo Co. v. Presbyterian Housing Development Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  3. Lower Frederick Township v. ClemmerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  4. Arlie Glen Skelton, Jr. v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981
  5. Brinich v. JenckaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000

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

3Cited by53 opinions

  1. Southwestern Energy Production Co. v. Forest Resources, LLCSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  2. Giant Food Stores, LLC v. THF Silver Spring Development, LPSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  3. Lytle v. CitiFinancial Services, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  4. Gaffer Insurance v. Discover Reinsurance Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  5. In Re DirecTV Early Cancellation LitigationDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2010

48 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