Legal Opinion

Commonwealth National Bank v. Harrisburg Polyclinic Hospital

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County

Decided October 23, 1975No. 26Published

1Opinion of the Court

DOWLING, J.,

We are denying defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings because we find there exists unresolved fact issues determinative of the rights of the parties. Such an extraordinary remedy may be granted only in cases “which are so free from doubt that a trial would clearly be a fruitless exercise.”: Bata v. Central-Penn National Bank of Phila., 423 Pa. 373, 378, 224 A. 2d 174 (1966).

The case presents several stimulating and provocative legal questions which might well have had their genesis in abar examination question but which are, unfortunately, authentic. On March 13, 1972,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Bata v. Central-Penn Nat. Bank of Phila.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  2. Hilbert v. RothSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  3. FLICKINGER ESTATE v. RitskySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  4. Ash v. MortensenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Thompson v. FoxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937

8 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