Johnson, Pets v. Phelan Hallinan & Schmieg
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT
EDELLA JOHNSON (A/K/A EDELLA : No. 11 WAL 2019 ROBINSON A/K/A EDELLA ROBINSON : JOHNSON) , ERIC JOHNSON, : INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF : Petition for Allowance of Appeal from OTHER SIMILARLY SITUATED FORMER : the Order of the Superior Court AND CURRENT HOMEOWNERS IN : PENNSYLVANIA, :
:
Petitioners :
: :
v. :
: :
PHELAN HALLINAN & SCHMIEG, LLP, :
:
Respondents :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 30th day of May, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is
GRANTED, LIMITED to the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining
issues. The issue, rephrased for clarity is:
Did the Superior Court err in determining the mortgage at issue was not a “residential mortgage” and that petitioners are therefore not entitled to seek damages pursuant to 41 P.S. §§406 and 502?
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Johnson, Pets v. Phelan Hallinan & Schmieg (Johnson, Pets v. Phelan Hallinan & Schmieg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.