Legal Opinion
Minetola v. Samacicio
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided May 4, 1960No. Appeal, 327PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Bell,
The lower Court wisely discharged a rule to show cause why the judgment taken by default should not be stricken off because there were no fatal defects apparent on the face of the record: McGary v. Lewis, 384 Pa. 173, 180-181, 119 A. 2d 497; Nixon v. Nixon, 329 Pa. 256, 198 A. 154; Wisor v. Wisor, 175 Pa. Superior Ct. 233, 103 A. 2d 498. The lower Court likewise discharged the rule to show cause why the judgment should not be opened. From this last Order, the petitioner appealed.
Plaintiff filed a summons and a Complaint in Equity on February 19, 1959. Plaintiff took…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Nixon v. NixonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Lened Homes, Inc. v. Philadelphia Department of Licenses & InspectionsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Vaughn v. LoveSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Ahrens v. GoldsteinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- Schuy'l T. Co. v. Sobolewski Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- In Re: Pamela Knapper, F/k/a Pamela Jones, Pamela Knapper William C. Miller v. Bankers Trust Co., as Trustee for Amresco Residential Securities CorpCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- Alliance Discount Corp. v. ShawSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
- Quatrochi v. GaitersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Ecumenical Enterprises, Inc. v. NADCO Construction, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Girard Trust Bank v. RemickSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.