Holmes v. Broodno
222 Pa. Super. 478
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided September 15, 1972·No. Appeal, No. 718·Published·Cited by 7 cases
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
Holmes v. Broodno, 222 Pa. Super. 478 (Pa. 1972).
222 Pa. Super. 478 (Holmes v. Broodno) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
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)