Legal Opinion

Brenckle v. Arblaster

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 7, 1983No. 715 and 716PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOFFMAN, Judge:

Appellants contend that the lower court erred in denying their request for a jury trial in declaratory judgment proceedings used to resolve an estate dispute, and in imposing sanctions of counsel fees, costs, and punitive damages against their respective shares of the estate. These contentions lack merit. Accordingly, we affirm.

The testator executed a will on October 12, 1972 naming his three daughters—appellants Arnetta Andrews and Loretta Hutchins and appellee Nancy Arblaster—as co-executrices and leaving his probate estate to be divided equally among them. In 1977, he…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Gold & Co. v. Northeast Theater Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  2. Shearer v. MooreSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  3. White v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  4. In Re Estate of RoosSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  5. Golomb v. KorusSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Geisinger Clinic v. Di CuccioSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  2. Ottavio v. Fibreboard Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  3. Township of South Strabane v. PiecknickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  4. Goodman v. GoodmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  5. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. AllenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

29 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