Legal Opinion
Purcell v. Bryn Mawr Hospital
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided October 17, 1990No. 107 Eastern District Appeal Docket 1989PublishedCited by 96 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
PAPADAKOS, Justice.
We are asked in this appeal to interpret Rule 2179 of our Rules of Civil Procedure dealing with venue in a suit against a corporation. The Rule states:
Rule 2179. Venue(a) Except as otherwise provided by an Act of Assembly or by subdivision (b) of this rule, a personal action against a corporation or similar entity may be brought in and only in(1) the county where its registered office or principal place of business is located;(2) a county where it regularly conducts business;(3) the county where the cause of action arose; or(4) a county where a…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Shambe v. Delaware Hudson R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Monaco v. Montgomery Cab Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
- Botwinick v. Credit Exchange, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
- County Construction Co. v. Livengood Construction Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Walker v. Ohio River Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by96 opinions
- Cheeseman v. Lethal Exterminator, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
- Zappala v. Brandolini Property Management, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Kubik v. Route 252, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Masel v. GlassmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
- Deyarmin v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
91 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.