Legal Opinion

Greater Finance Company v. Harris

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 22, 1976No. 429PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JACOBS, Judge:

This is an appeal from an order denying a petition to open a judgment taken by default. For the reasons stated hereinafter, we affirm the order of the court below.

[ 1] The cases are legion, the principles oft-cited, and the limitations of appellate inquiry well-defined. “Our review of the decision of the court below [on a petition to open a judgment by default] ... is guided by several well established principles, foremost of which is that ‘only when there has been an abuse of discretion by the court below in refusing to open a default judgment will this Court reverse . . . . ’…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Mielcuszny Et Ux. v. Rosol (Et Ux.)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  2. Kraynick v. HERTZSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  3. McCoy v. Public Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  4. Wenger v. ZieglerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  5. Garrett's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Bollinger v. CressmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  2. Greater Finance Co. v. HarrisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  3. Greater Finance Company v. HarrisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  4. Nardulli v. John Carlo, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  5. Nardulli v. John Carlo, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API