Legal Opinion

Sotak v. Nitschke

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 20, 1982No. 721PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

POPOVICH, Judge:

This is an appeal from the final decree entered by the court in equity which directed appellants-defendants, Richard and Ursula Nitschke, to perform specifically the agreement of sale they negotiated with appellees-plaintiffs, Michael and Karen Sotak. We affirm in part and remand for the reasons herein stated.

In this appeal, appellants raise the following issues: (1) whether the trial court failed to comply with Pa.R.C.P. 1517 because the decree nisi failed to include a statement of the issues, a chronological statement of the facts, and a discussion of the legal issues…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  2. Commonwealth v. RiniSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  3. Powell v. ShepardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  4. Rosenfeld v. RosenfeldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  5. In Re Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights to B. M. D.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. East Coast Paving & Sealcoating, Inc. v. North Allegheny School DistrictCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
  2. Eighth North-Val, Inc. v. William L. Parkinson, D.D.S., P.C., Pension TrustSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  3. Hudgins v. Jewel T Discount StoreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  4. Commonwealth ex rel. Bloomsburg State College v. PorterCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  5. Antonietta v. Patsch Bros., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Washington County1984

2 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