Dye v. M.L.M. Ltd.
This text of 531 A.2d 420 (Dye v. M.L.M. Ltd.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[554]*554ORDER
AND NOW, this 18th day of September, 1987, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED that the petition for allowance of appeal is granted limited to the issues of whether the trial judge erred by not awarding attorney’s fees under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2310 et seq., and whether the trial judge erred by not trebling the jury’s award under the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, Act of November 24, 1976, P.L. 1166, as amended, 73 P.S. § 201-1 et seq.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
531 A.2d 420, 515 Pa. 553, 1987 Pa. LEXIS 909, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dye-v-mlm-ltd-pa-1987.