Brooks v. Schachtel

449 A.2d 752, 303 Pa. Super. 408, 1982 Pa. Super. LEXIS 5063
CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedAugust 27, 1982
DocketAppeal No. 193
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 449 A.2d 752 (Brooks v. Schachtel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brooks v. Schachtel, 449 A.2d 752, 303 Pa. Super. 408, 1982 Pa. Super. LEXIS 5063 (Pa. Ct. App. 1982).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The procedural posture of this appeal is essentially identical to that of Johnson v. Keystone Insurance Company, 299 Pa.Super.Ct. 187, 445 A.2d 517 (1982). Accordingly, we shall vacate the order dismissing appellant’s complaint for noncompliance with the “240 Day Rule” and Philadelphia Rule of Civil Procedure 151, and remand the case to the court below for further proceedings consistent with the opinion in Johnson v. Keystone Insurance Company, supra.

Order vacated, and case remanded for further proceedings. Jurisdiction relinquished.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Jackson v. Segars
454 A.2d 640 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
449 A.2d 752, 303 Pa. Super. 408, 1982 Pa. Super. LEXIS 5063, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brooks-v-schachtel-pasuperct-1982.