Legal Opinion

Neustein v. Insurance Placement Facility

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 17, 1979No. 1279-1281PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOFFMAN, Judge:

Appellant contends that the lower court erred in denying its petition for a rule to show cause why satisfaction should not be set aside and judgment opened. We disagree and, accordingly, affirm the order of the lower court.

This case, involving three appeals from the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, arises from a fire loss to premises in which the three appellees had an interest. Appellant had issued a fire insurance policy on the premises, and appellees brought separate suits to recover the insurance proceeds. Appellant defended on the basis that the fire loss was the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Epstein v. KramerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  2. Shoup v. ShoupSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
  3. Montague v. ReadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Winfree v. Philadelphia Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  2. Brandt v. EagleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  3. Linde Enterprises, Inc. v. Hazelton City AuthoritySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  4. Morris North American, Inc. v. KingDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
  5. Wilk v. KocharaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994

6 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