Legal Opinion

Princeton Sportswear Corp. v. H & M Associates

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 8, 1985No. 01898PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOFFMAN, Judge:

This is an appeal from an order entering judgment in favor of appellee-lessee and against appellants-lessors in the amount of $600,000.00. Because we find that certain clauses in the lease agreement exculpate appellants from liability for damages allegedly sustained by appellee, we reverse the order below.

Pursuant to the terms of a May 2, 1973 lease agreement, appellee, Princeton Sportswear Corp., became a third floor tenant of Building No. 12 of a Philadelphia industrial complex known as the “Hardwick and McGee Complex” (H & M Complex). This complex was owned by appellant H &…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Dilliplaine v. Lehigh Valley Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  2. Employers Liability Assurance Corp. v. Greenville Business Men's Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  3. Richard's 5 & 10, Inc. v. Brooks Harvey Realty InvestorsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Bedrosky v. HinerNebraska Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Princeton Sportswear Corp. v. H & M AssociatesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  3. Princeton Sportswear Corp. v. H & M AssociatesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  4. Worman v. FedEx Ground Package System Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lehigh County2005
  5. Princeton Sportswear Corp. v. H & M AssociatesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986

1 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