Legal Opinion
Francisco v. Ford Motor Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided June 11, 1991No. 2074PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WIEAND, Judge:
More than four years after service of the complaint in this products liability litigation, Hertz Penske Truck Leasing, Inc. (Hertz) filed a petition for leave to join Simpson Industries, Inc. as an additional defendant. The trial court denied the petition, and Hertz appealed. It contends that the denial of its petition constituted an abuse of the trial court’s discretion. We disagree and affirm the order of the trial court.
Pa.R.C.P. 2253 establishes the time within which to join an additional defendant as follows:
[Njeither praecipe for a writ to join an additional defendant nor…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Zakian v. LILJESTRANDSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
- Commonwealth v. PowellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- NPW Medical Center of N.E. Penna., Inc. v. LS Design Group, P.C.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Riccobono v. Keystone Helicopter Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Prime Properties Development Corp. v. BinnsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Kessock, J. v. Conestoga Title InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
- Lawrence v. MeekerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Hann v. Austin, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Westmoreland County1992