Legal Opinion

Pinsky v. Master

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 2, 1941No. Appeal 239PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

The plaintiff began this action in trespass against the administratrix of the estate of Bernard A. Master, deceased, and the defendant brought upon the record Goldstein’s Fruit and Produce, Inc., and Yernon Ford, as additional defendants, under Rule No. 2252, Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Thereupon, Goldstein’s filed an answer which was served on plaintiff on August 2, 1941. Plaintiff failed to file a supplementary statement against Goldstein’s within twenty days, as required by Rule No. 2258, Pa. R. C. P. After six months, she petitioned the court below for leave to file…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Fuel City Mfg. Co. v. Waynesburg Products Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  2. National Finance Corp. v. BergdollSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  3. Horning v. DavidSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Texas & Block House Fish & Game Club v. Bonnell Run Hunting & Fishing Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  2. Spilove v. Cross Transportation, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  3. Wheel v. Park BuildingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  4. Britton v. Continental Mining & Smelting Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  5. Quaker City Chocolate & Confectionery Co. v. Warnock Building Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943

28 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