Laird v. Clearfield & Mahoning Railway Co.

873 A.2d 697, 582 Pa. 559, 2005 Pa. LEXIS 854
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Laird v. Clearfield & Mahoning Railway Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 591 Pa. 322
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 26, 2005·No. Petition No. 295 WAL 2004·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 26th day of April, 2005, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, limited to the following issue:

Whether the trial court’s order rendering judgment “upon agreement and stipulation of the parties,” with damages “as limited by previous rulings of this Court” and in the context of the trial court’s on-the-record contemplation of “an order that would preserve any and all rights [Petitioners] have for appellate review on any prior proceeding in this case,” had [560]*560the effect of foreclosing Petitioners’ appeal rights relative to such prior proceedings and/or rulings?

The matter is taken as submitted on the briefs.

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

Laird v. Clearfield & Mahoning Railway Co., 873 A.2d 697, 582 Pa. 559, 2005 Pa. LEXIS 854 (Pa. 2005).

873 A.2d 697 (Laird v. Clearfield & Mahoning Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.