Legal Opinion

Womer v. Hilliker

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 17, 2006No. 25 MAP 2005PublishedCited by 176 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Chief Justice CAPPY.

This appeal concerns Pa.R.C.P. No. 1042.3, which requires that a certificate of merit (“COM”) be filed in any professional liability action in which it is alleged that a licensed professional deviated from the acceptable standard of care. Presently, we consider whether the Superior Court correctly reversed the trial court’s order denying Appellee Garth Womer (“Womer”) relief from the judgment of non pros that was entered against him due to his failure to file a COM. For all of the reasons that follow, the order of the Superior Court is reversed.

The relevant facts…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Grady v. Frito-Lay, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  2. Sahutsky v. H.H. Knoebel SonsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  3. Gardner v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  4. Pomerantz v. GoldsteinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  5. Kurtas v. KurtasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

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

3Cited by176 opinions

  1. Bruno, D., Aplts. v. Erie InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  2. Liggon-Redding v. Estate of Robert SugarmanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2011
  3. Green Acres Rehabilitation & Nursing Center v. SullivanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
  4. Berg v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
  5. Ditch v. Waynesboro HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007

171 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