Legal Opinion
Hatfield v. Continental Imports, Inc.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided August 10, 1990No. Nos. 132 and 317PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DEL SOLE, Judge:
Following this court’s grant of permission to take an interlocutory appeal, these appeals were filed challenging a trial court order which determined that it was appropriate for a settlement agreement to be brought into evidence at trial. We reverse.
This action was initiated by Agnes and Herbert Hatfield seeking to recover damages which were alleged to be a result of injuries Mrs. Hatfield sustained to her back following a fall from a chair which suddenly collapsed. The Hatfields set forth causes of action in negligence and products liability against Continental Imports Inc.,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Booth v. Mary Carter Paint CompanyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1967
- Ward v. OchoaSupreme Court of Florida · 1973
- Wilkerson v. Allied Van Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Hareng v. BlankeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
- Weingrad v. Philadelphia Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hatfield v. Continental Imports, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Hammel v. ChristianSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Hammel v. ChristianSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Hatfield v. Continental Imports, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992