Treu v. Harleysville Insurance
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
JOHNSON, Judge.
On this appeal, we are asked to determine whether the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia, in relying upon Philadelphia Local Rule *212.2, erroneously imposed sanctions upon appellants. Because we have no record evidence that the trial court followed the procedures set forth in Rule *212.2, we reverse.
The facts can be summarized as follows: Joseph and Elena Treu (the Treus) purchased a homeowner’s insurance policy from Harleysville Insurance Company (Harleysville). In July 1992, the Treus submitted a claim to Harleysville for damage to their home caused by a storm. Thereafter, the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Commonwealth v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Wiegand v. WiegandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- McCaffrey v. Pittsburgh Athletic Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
- Commonwealth v. IngberSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Hatalowich v. BednarskiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Stewart v. Owens-Corning FiberglasSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Baker v. HornDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2005
- Washington v. SobinaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2005
- Mancini v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthorityCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Zeiter v. Christman, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Berks County2003