Legal Opinion
Shearer v. Naftzinger
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided March 6, 2000No. 197 Middle District Appeal Docket 1998PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
NIGRO, Justice.
The sole issue before us is whether the statute of limitations set forth at 42 Pa.C.S. § 5529 constitutes a defense in a proceeding to revive and continue the lien of a judgment. For the following reasons, we affirm the order of the Superior Court.
On July 12, 1974, appellees Paul and' Jeanne Shearer (Shearers) entered judgment by confession against appellants Charles and Elizabeth Naftzinger (Naftzingers) in the amount of $9,600.00 at No. 610 September Term 1974 (Cumberland County). Praecipes for writs of revival were filed by the Shearers on May 29, 1979, May 10, 1984,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- E. J. McAleer & Co. v. Iceland Products, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- In Re Upset Sale, Tax Cl. Bureau of BerksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Donnelly v. BauerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Adams Sanitation v. DEPT. OF ENV. PROT.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Mid-State Bank & Trust Co. v. Globalnet International, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Blumenstock v. GibsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Bennyhoff v. PappertSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
- Boro Construction, Inc. v. Ridley School DistrictCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
- Upper Makefield Township v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Deek Investment, L.P. v. Murray, F.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.