Kincy v. Petro

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Kincy v. Petro

972 A.2d 483, 601 Pa. 315, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 870

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMay 19, 2009

DocketAppeal No. 596 EAL 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 972 A.2d 483 (Kincy v. Petro) 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

Kincy v. Petro, 972 A.2d 483, 601 Pa. 315, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 870 (Pa. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

[316]*316 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 19th day of May, 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED to the following issue:

Whether under Pa.R.C.P. 213(a) a trial court order, which states that two separately docketed cases involving different plaintiffs and different theories of liability are “consolidated for all purposes,” and does not otherwise specify that a joint trial of the cases is to be held, operates automatically to merge the pleadings filed in the separate cases?

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

[316]*316 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 19th day of May, 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED to the following issue:

Whether under Pa.R.C.P. 213(a) a trial court order, which states that two separately docketed cases involving different plaintiffs and different theories of liability are “consolidated for all purposes,” and does not otherwise specify that a joint trial of the cases is to be held, operates automatically to merge the pleadings filed in the separate cases?

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

972 A.2d 483, 601 Pa. 315, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kincy-v-petro-pa-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack