Fidelity Bank v. Tiernan
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
SPAETH, Judge:
Four members of the court are in agreement that the judgment of the lower court cannot stand. The President Judge and I would enter judgment n.o.v. Judge HOFFMAN and Judge CERCONE, however, would only grant a new trial; they do not find it necessary to decide the issue that the President Judge and I regard as dispositive. In these circumstances, so that there may be an order supported by a majority of the court the President Judge and I concur in the granting of a new trial. The reasons for a new trial are stated in Judge HOFFMAN’s opinion; the reasons for judgment n.o.v., in…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Perry v. PayneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
- Dilks v. Flohr ChevroletSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Employers Liability Assurance Corp. v. Greenville Business Men's Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
- Galligan v. ArovitchSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
- KOTWASINSKI v. RASNERSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Fidelity Leasing Corp. v. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1980
- Richard's 5 & 10, Inc. v. Brooks Harvey Realty InvestorsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Bachman & Miller v. High Construction Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County1991
- Fidelity Bank v. TiernanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977