Legal Opinion

Hightower v. Bekins Van Lines Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 12, 1979No. 1427PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAN der VOORT, Judge:

I. On the Appellee’s Application to Dismiss the Appeal or to Strike Matters from Appellant’s Brief

We will not grant the Application to Dismiss the Appeal, and will consider the appeal on its merits. We tend to agree with appellee that the appellant’s reference to an insurance company as the real party in interest is inconsistent with the record, as established by the pleadings filed by the parties; but we note (page 55 of the transcribed oral argument before Judge Chalfin) that defendant’s attorney stated in the lower court, without challenge, that “this is a subrogation…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Juliet M. D. Anton v. Greyhound Van Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1978
  2. Chandler v. Aero Mayflower Transit Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1967
  3. Paramount Dress Co. v. Kirby & Kirby, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  4. Elizabeth Brannon v. Smith Dray Line & Storage Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1972

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Tanner v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Borough of Mifflinburg v. HeimSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  3. Carpitella v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Kenney v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthorityCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  5. Kosek v. Yetter, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Adams County2005

4 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