Legal Opinion · Dissent

Scungio Borst v. 410 Shurs Lane Developers, LLC

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 20, 2014No. 2493 EDA 2012PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION BY

BENDER, P.J.E.:

I respectfully dissent. I disagree with the Majority’s • affirmance of the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Robert DeBolt, president and fifty percent shareholder of 410 Shurs Lane Developers, LLC (410 SLD), in the suit filed by Scungio Borst & Associates (SBA) to recover sums due it for unpaid work in connection with a construction contract. Because I believe that the Majority’s opinion neglects to include the “agents of the *111owner acting within their authority” language in defining the term “owner” as defined in the Contractor and…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Universal Builders, Inc. v. Moon Motor Lodge, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  2. Ruthrauff, Inc. v. Ravin, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  3. Wagner v. Graziano Construction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  4. Hirsch v. EPL Technologies, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  5. Mohney v. McClureSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Scungio Borst v. 410 Shurs Lane Developers, LLCSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API