Holmes v. Broodno
222 Pa. Super. 478
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedSeptember 15, 1972
DocketAppeal, No. 718
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases
This text of 222 Pa. Super. 478 (Holmes v. Broodno) 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.
Bluebook
Holmes v. Broodno, 222 Pa. Super. 478 (Pa. 1972).
Opinions
Opinion by
The quashing of the appeal is reversed for reasons stated in Meta v. Yellow Gab Company of Philadelphia, 222 Pa. Superior Ct. 469, 294 A. 2d 898 (1972).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Mikita v. Bailey Homes, Inc.
401 A.2d 1367 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1979)
Friedgen v. Evangelical Manor
384 A.2d 1309 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1978)
James F. Oakley, Inc. v. Sch. Dist. of Phila.
346 A.2d 765 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1975)
Black & Brown, Inc. v. Home for the Accepted, Inc.
335 A.2d 722 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1975)
Meta v. Yellow Cab Co.
294 A.2d 898 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1972)
Holmes v. Broodno
294 A.2d 903 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1972)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
222 Pa. Super. 478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holmes-v-broodno-pa-1972.