Meinhart v. Heaster
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
HUDOCK, Judge:
This is an appeal from the order of the trial court which, inter alia, granted Appellees’ preliminary objections and dis*435missed Appellants’ claim for breach of a lease-purchase agreement. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
The facts and procedural history may be summarized as follows: On March 22, 1988, the parties entered into a written lease and option to purchase certain realty which Appellees jointly owned. On October 22, 1990, Appellants filed a complaint in which they alleged that Appellees’ failure to deliver “clear and marketable title” caused Appellees to breach the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Praisner v. StockerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Motheral v. BurkhartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Ambrose v. Cross Creek CondominiumsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Penox Technologies, Inc. v. Foster Medical Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Holmes v. LadoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Britt v. Chestnut Hill CollegeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Fabral, Inc. v. B & B Roofing Co., Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
- Hillgartner v. Port Authority, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County2006
- Vause v. Middletown Township, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Bucks County1996