McHugh v. Proctor & Gamble
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
GANTMAN, J.:
¶ 1 Appellant, John McHugh, Jr., asks us to determine whether the trial court erred when it granted the motion for summary judgment, filed on behalf of Appel-lee, Proctor & Gamble, which terminated Appellant’s personal injury action. We hold the trial court properly granted Ap-pellee’s motion for summary judgment because it was timely filed prior to the start of the parties’ second trial and there were no genuine issues of material fact to preclude summary judgment in this case. Accordingly, we affirm.
¶ 2 The relevant facts of this appeal are as follows:
This appeal derives from a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Miller v. Sacred Heart HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Devine v. HuttSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
- Harber Philadelphia Center City Office Ltd. v. LPCI Ltd. PartnershipSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Mentzer v. OgnibeneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Grandelli v. Methodist HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Krentz v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Moranko, F. v. Downs RacingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
- Brown, A. v. Kinser B604, LLCSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
- Madrak, S. v. Blink FitnessSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2023
- Menken, J. v. GCG Mann-HofSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.