Legal Opinion

Gordon v. Continental Casualty Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 22, 1933No. Appeal, 87PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Simpson,

The questions raised on this record are both interesting and important, and have been argued with marked ability by the respective counsel. As, however, the appeal is from a summary judgment, entered against defendant for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, it cannot be sustained if a substantial doubt exists as to the propriety of its entry: Davis v. Investment Land Co., 296 Pa. 449; Chelten Ave. Building Corporation v. Mayer, 306 Pa. 225. Under such circumstances, the judgment will be reversed and the parties remitted to a trial to establish the facts on…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Gunster v. Scranton Illuminating, Heat & Power Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
  2. Davis v. Investment Land Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  3. National Union Fire Insurance v. Mellon National BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  4. Chelten Avenue Building Corp. v. MayerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Provident Trust Co. v. Judicial B. & L. Assn.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  2. Integrity Trust Co. v. St. Rita B. & L. Assn.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  3. Gordon v. Continental Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  4. Ashland Towson Corp. v. KasunicSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  5. Alice Blair v. Berkshire Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970

10 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