Legal Opinion

Colacioppo Et Ux. v. Holcombe

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 4, 1949No. Appeal, 179PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Dithrich, J.,

This is an appeal from the refusal of the court below to open a judgment entered under Rule 1047 of the Pa. Rules of Civil Procedure, which provides: “The prothonotary, on praecipe of the plaintiff, shall enter judgment against a defendant by whom no appearance or pleading to the complaint is filed. In this case, the damages shall be assessed at a trial at which the issues shall be limited to the amount of the damages.” A motion to strike the judgment was also made but at the oral argument and in appellant’s brief it is stated that “counsel for the Appellant will…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Fuel City Mfg. Co. v. Waynesburg Products Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  2. Pinsky v. MasterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. National Finance Corp. v. BergdollSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  4. Brown & Bigelow, Inc. v. BorishSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
  5. Horning v. DavidSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. BALK v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  2. Texas & Block House Fish & Game Club v. Bonnell Run Hunting & Fishing Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  3. Spilove v. Cross Transportation, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  4. Coury v. TsapisWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Bethlehem Apparatus Co. v. H. N. Crowder, Jr., Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976

8 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