Legal Opinion

Pennfield Corp. v. Meadow Valley Electric, Inc.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 17, 1992No. 238PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CAVANAUGH, Judge:

Appellant Meadow Valley Electric, Inc. (“appellant”), appeals from the December 13, 1990, order of the trial court sustaining preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer filed by appellee York Electrical Supply Co., t/d/b/a YESCO (“appellee”). The appellant asserts novel arguments which we find to be pernicious to accepted rules of establishing causation and liability. In particular, appellant’s arguments would obviate the well-settled rule that “alternative liability” will not lie absent some sort of negligent conduct by the potential tortfeasors. It asks that we…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Hamil v. BashlineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  2. Summers v. TiceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Sindell v. Abbott LaboratoriesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Field v. Philadelphia Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  5. Firing v. KephartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. City of Philadelphia v. Lead Industries Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
  2. In Re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2005
  3. Hurt v. Philadelphia Housing AuthorityDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1992
  4. City Of Philadelphia v. Lead Industries Association, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
  5. McNeil v. City of EastonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2010

10 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