Legal Opinion

Sovereign Bank v. Valentino

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 27, 2006PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY GANTMAN, J.:

¶ 1 The parties, Sovereign Bank (“Sovereign”) and Jeffrey Ganter, ask us to determine whether the trial court erred when it entered judgment in favor of Sovereign in the amount of $143,000.00, based upon a claim of concerted tortious action. We hold the trial court erred when it did not enter judgment in favor of Sovereign for $303,323.90, the entire harm caused by Mr. Ganter’s tortious conduct, where concerted tortious action, as set forth in Section 876 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, is a recognized civil cause of action under Pennsylvania law. We further hold…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Burnside v. Abbott LaboratoriesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  2. Skipworth v. Lead Industries Ass'n, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  3. Turney Media Fuel, Inc. v. Toll Bros., Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  4. Cummins v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  5. Koken v. SteinbergCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Adelphia Recovery Trust v. Bank of America, N.A.District Court, S.D. New York · 2009
  2. Hranec Sheet Metal, Inc. v. Metalico Pittsburgh, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  3. Shepherd v. Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLCSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  4. Bayview Loan Servicing LLC v. WickerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  5. Marion, D. v. Bryn Mawr Trust Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2021

24 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