Legal Opinion

Trieschock v. Owens Corning Fiberglas Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 24, 1986No. 00401PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BROSKY, Judge:

This appeal is from summary judgment. In dispute here is the trial court’s decision that the statute of limitations had run in this “creeping disease” case. 1 The disposition of this issue entails consideration of two questions novel in this jurisdiction. First, with what degree of certainty must a plaintiff be aware of a medical condition in order to start the statute of limitations period running? Second, does a tentative, preliminary diagnosis — insufficient to start the statute running — activate a duty to make, with due diligence, further enquiries into the cause of his…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Cathcart v. Keene Industrial InsulationSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  2. Blue Diamond Coal Company v. PannellSupreme Court of Virginia · 1961
  3. Mead v. American Smelting & Refining CompanyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1965
  4. Nelson v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1978

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Denise Bohus v. Stanley A. BeloffCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1991
  2. Dalrymple v. BrownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  3. Wyatt v. A-Best, CompanyTennessee Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Debiec v. Cabot Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2003
  5. Mazur v. Merck & Co., Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1990

30 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