Legal Opinion

Zimmerman v. Harrisburg Fudd I, L.P.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 19, 2009No. 1997 MDA 2008PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

CLELAND, J.r

¶ 1 We are asked to decide whether a contractor who has obtained a judgment against an owner under the Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act may recover post-judgment interest and penalties, as well as attorney’s fees and expenses incurred to collect the money owed. We hold he can.

¶ 2 Appellant Robert W. Zimmerman (Zimmerman) appeals the order denying his motion to recover from Appellee Harrisburg Fudd I, LLC (Fudd) the statutory interest, penalty, and attorney fees and expenses available to building contractors when project owners have violated the prompt payment…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Pittsburgh Construction Co. v. GriffithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  2. Daset Mining Corp. v. Industrial Fuels Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. Profit Wize Marketing v. WiestSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  4. Commonwealth v. HeberlingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  5. Centolanza v. Lehigh Valley Dairies, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Prieto Corp. v. Gambone Construction Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  2. Lomas, R. v. Kravitz, J.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
  3. El-Gharbaoui, A. v. Ajayi, A.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2021
  4. Scungio Borst & Associates v. 410 Shurs Lane Developers, LLCSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  5. Scungio Borst v. 410 Shurs Lane Developers, LLCSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API