Legal Opinion

Kalina v. Eckert

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 2, 1985No. 240PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WIEAND, Judge:

In this action in equity to enforce an agreement for the sale of real estate, the trial court entered a summary judgment in favor of the sellers. The buyer, the court held, had forfeited his rights under the agreement of sale because a formal mortgage commitment had been obtained two days after the date required by the agreement. 1 We reverse.

In determining whether summary judgment is proper, a court must examine the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and all doubt must be resolved against the entry of such a judgment. Pocono International Raceway, Inc.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Pocono International Raceway, Inc. v. Pocono Produce, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Thorsen v. Iron and Glass BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. Chorba v. Davlisa Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Straup v. Times HeraldSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  5. Shipley v. Pittsburgh & L. E. R. Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1949

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. McCausland v. WagnerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  2. Liazis v. Kosta, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  3. Quinn v. BuppSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  4. Cambria-Stoltz Enterprises v. TNT InvestmentsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  5. Hoelscher v. SchenewerkMissouri Court of Appeals · 1991

5 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