Legal Opinion

Fred Lowenschuss Associates v. DePallo

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 11, 1980No. 2844PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STRANAHAN, Judge:

This case raises three procedural issues which arise from a rather complicated factual and procedural background. These background facts must be set forth in some detail in order to fully understand the questions presented.

In 1974 Mildred Wise DePallo retained the services of the plaintiffs’ law firm on a contingent fee arrangement to represent her in filing an election against the will of her husband, Anthony J. DePallo. Plaintiffs also agreed to attempt to obtain support for Mrs. DePallo from her five grown children,1 Peter, Arlene, Mildred Ann, Diane and Carol Joy DePallo,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Feingold v. Bell of PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  2. Hudock v. Donegal Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  3. Catanese v. SciricaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  4. Lane v. SchachtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  5. Lampl v. LatkanichSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1967

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Canulli v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Barna v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Rochester & Pittsburgh Coal Company)Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  3. United States National Bank v. JohnsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  4. Barna v. WCAB (ROCH. & PGH. COAL CO.).Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  5. Fred Lowenschuss Associates v. DePalloSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API