Legal Opinion

Harcourt v. General Accident Insurance

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 5, 1992No. 00752PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CERCONE, Judge:

This is an appeal from a final order sustaining preliminary objections filed on behalf of General Accident Insurance Company (“General Accident”) and Omni-Med Consultants, Inc. (“Omni-Med”). The order dismissed with prejudice a complaint filed by plaintiffiappellant B. Timothy Harcourt, D.C. 1 For the reasons explained below, we vacate the order of the trial court and reinstate appellant’s complaint.

Certain relevant facts in the instant case have been correctly set forth by the trial court as follows:

The [plaintiff/appellant], B. Timothy Harcourt, D.C., is a doctor of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bash v. Bell Telephone Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  2. Pawlowski v. SmortoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  3. Drummond v. DrummondSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  4. Cavaliere v. Duff's Business InstituteSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  5. CROSBY BY CROSBY v. SultzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Terminato v. Pennsylvania National InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. Gilderman v. State Farm InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  3. Barnes v. McKellarSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  4. Barnum v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  5. Panea v. IsdanerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001

11 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