Legal Opinion

Winterhalter v. West Penn Power Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 26, 1986No. 01045PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HESTER, Judge:

In this appeal, appellants argue that the lower court improperly granted a motion to amend in order to plead a new defense, and a motion for summary judgment filed by appellee Asplundh Tree Expert Company, Inc. (hereinafter “Asplundh”). Appellants contend that the pleadings were closed and, alternatively, that the defense of scope of employment asserted in the motion to amend had been waived. 1 The entry of summary judgment, which was based on that defense, must therefore be reversed, according to appellants. Having reviewed the arguments we affirm in part and reverse in part.

Thi…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Schaffer v. LarzelereSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  2. Praisner v. StockerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  3. Rybas v. WapnerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  4. Bata v. Central-Penn National BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  5. Junk v. East End Fire DepartmentSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Motheral v. BurkhartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Horowitz v. Universal Underwriters InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  3. Danko Development Corp. v. Econocast Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Roberson v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  5. Chaney v. Meadville Medical CenterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006

13 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