Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. Pittsburgh

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 31, 1975No. Appeal, No. 466PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Hoffman, J.,

Appellants contend that the lower court erred in refusing to vacate the judgment entered against appellant Harry E. Stockline pursuant to an award of arbitrators, where it appeared that appellant City of Pittsburgh had taken a timely appeal from the award of arbitrators with the intent that it be effective for both parties.

Appellee, plaintiff below, was allegedly injured in a collision with a truck driven by appellant Stockline, an employee of the City of Pittsburgh who was driving a truck owned by the City of Pittsburgh, on the night of January 21, 1971. Appellee…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Smith CaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  2. Hammerman v. LeeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  3. Flouders v. FOSTERSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  4. Portock v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  5. Washik v. CHASESuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1974

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Milford Employees Ass'n v. City of MilfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
  2. Ottaviano v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthoritySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  3. Valler v. LeeCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1997
  4. OTTAVIANO v. SEPTASuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  5. Werner v. Springfield Dodge, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978

12 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