Legal Opinion

Waugh v. Steelton Taxicab Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 24, 1952No. Appeal, No. 21PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Musmanno,

The plaintiff, who was injured while riding in a taxicab owned by a “Steelton Taxicab Company”, brought a suit in trespass against the said Steelton Taxicab Company, designating it as a corporation, only to find, after the statute of limitations had run, that the said taxicab “company” was not a corporation but a fictitious name used by Anthony John Kosir in the conduct of his taxicab business.

The plaintiff then obtained a rule on Kosir to show cause why the complaint should not be amended, to substitute as defendant, instead of the designation originally…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Wright v. Eureka Tempered Copper Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
  2. Gozdonovic v. Pleasant Hills Realty Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  3. McGinnis v. Valvoline Oil Works, Ltd.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
  4. Miller, Admrx. v. Jacobs, Admrx.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. Paulish v. BakaitisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  2. Powell v. SutliffSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  3. Fretts v. PavettiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  4. Downes v. HODINSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  5. Jacob's Air Conditioning & Heating v. Associated Heating & Air ConditioningSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987

40 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