Legal Opinion

Nastasiak v. Scoville Enterprises, Ltd.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 6, 1993No. 698PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WIEAND, Judge:

In this appeal we are asked to review an order which denied a request to strike the discontinuance of an action entered by counsel without the knowledge or consent of his client. After careful review, we conclude that the trial court abused its discretion; and, therefore, we reverse.

On March 12, 1985, Peter Nastasiak and Patricia Nastasiak, minority shareholders, filed a complaint in mandamus against their corporation, Scoville Enterprises, Ltd., and Karl Blessing, a corporate officer, seeking, inter alia, an inspection of corporate books and records to determine whether…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Archbishop v. KARLAKSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  2. Murdoch v. MurdochSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  3. Hopewell v. HendrieSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  4. Garnet v. D'AlonzoCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  5. Thomas v. Hempt BrothersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Deutsche Bank National Trust v. Taggart, K.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
  2. PHH Mortgage Corp. v. Taggart, K.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2022
  3. Wilmington Twp. v. C. HahnCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2020
  4. Wilmington Twp. v. C. HahnCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API