Legal Opinion

Hathi v. Krewstown Park Apartments

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 19, 1989No. 1356PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OLSZEWSKI, Judge:

Appellants, Raminik Hathi and Shushila Hathi, appeal from an order of the trial court granting appellees' motion for partial summary judgment. Appellants urge us to interpret 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5533(b), which provides an infancy exception to time for commencing an action, as including parents’ claims for medical expenses and loss of minor’s services due to personal injury to a minor child. For reasons that follow, we affirm.

On October 29, 1986, appellants commenced suit to recover damages in their own right and on behalf of their minor son, Shamil, for personal injuries sustained…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Weiss v. Keystone MacK Sales, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Meisel v. LittleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
  3. Dellacasse v. Floyd Exrs.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  4. Neil v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  5. Olivieri v. AdamsDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1968

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. O'NEILL v. Checker Motors Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  2. Dansak v. Cameron Coca-Cola Bottling Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  3. Lower Lake Dock Co. v. Messinger Bearing Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  4. Garay v. OverholtzerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  5. Atkinson v. HaugSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993

29 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