Commonwealth National Bank v. Harrisburg Polyclinic Hospital
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County
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
- Bata v. Central-Penn Nat. Bank of Phila.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
- Hilbert v. RothSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
- FLICKINGER ESTATE v. RitskySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
- Ash v. MortensenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Thompson v. FoxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.