Legal Opinion

Weinberg v. Comcast Cablevision of Philadelphia, L.P.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 30, 2000PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KELLY, J.:

¶ 1 Appellant, Paul S. Weinberg, General Partner trading as Hill House (“Hill House”), asks us to reverse the order and judgment of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, confirming an arbitration award in favor of Appellee, Comcast Ca-blevision of Philadelphia, L.P. (“Comcast”). We hold that the trial court properly confirmed the arbitrator’s award in favor of Comcast. Accordingly, we affirm.

¶2 The relevant facts and procedural history of this case are as follows. Hill House is a multiple dwelling apartment building in Philadelphia. Hill House contracts with ACS Enterprises to…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Bragg v. WeaverSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
  3. Balent v. City of Wilkes-BarreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  4. Commonwealth v. BarudSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  5. In Re Appeal of Borough of ChurchillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Maryland Casualty Co. v. Odyssey Contracting Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  2. Rose Mary Knick v. Township of ScottCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2017
  3. Healey v. Comcast of Southeast Pennsylvania, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API