Legal Opinion

Bloshinski v. Falaz

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 10, 1951No. Appeal, 26PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Hirt, J.,

In this equity proceeding, brought by plaintiffs for the specific performance of a written agreement for the sale of land, the lower court sustained the defendant’s preliminary objections and dismissed the bill. The court concluded that defendant properly had rescinded the contract since time was of its essence and plaintiffs had defaulted in the payments of purchase money stipulated therein. In our view plaintiffs’ bill together with a proffered amendment, sets forth a good cause of action requiring an answer and disposition on the merits. The decree will be reversed.

This…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Cohn v. Weiss Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  2. Roth v. HartlSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  3. Erkess v. EisenthalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
  4. Unatin 7-Up Co., Inc. v. SolomonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  5. Vankirk v. PattersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Hayes v. AltmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  2. LEH v. BURKESuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  3. Davis v. BuckhamSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  4. Iseman v. Joe F. Sherman Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  5. Howard Hanna v. Hornung, M.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2022

3 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