Legal Opinion

Emert v. Larami Corp.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 27, 1964No. Appeal, No. 157PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Jones,

This appeal attacks an order of the Court of Common Pleas No. 2 of Philadelphia County which upheld the validity of a deputized service of a writ of summons in a trespass action under Rule 1043, Pa. R. C. P.

Roger L. Emert, a minor, and Richard L. Emert and Alice L. Emert (Emerts), instituted a trespass action in Court of Common Pleas No. 2 of Philadelphia County against Larami Corporation (Larami). In their complaint, the Emerts alleged: that they reside in Perkasie, Bucks County;1 that Larami is engaged, as manufacturer, employer, supplier, wholesaler and/or…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. United States v. Memphis Cotton Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
  2. Fisher v. HillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  3. Shenandoah Borough v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  4. Commonwealth v. BallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  5. Cox v. Wilkes-Barre Railway Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939

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

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Kuisis v. Baldwin-Lima-Hamilton Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  2. Commonwealth v. CasperSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  3. Action Industries, Inc. v. WiedemanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  4. Goff v. Armbrecht Motor Truck Sales, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  5. Kring v. University of PittsburghSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

28 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