Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebenek & Eck, P.L.L.C. v. Law Firm of Malone Middleman, PC

166 A.3d 1236, 2017 Pa. LEXIS 419
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebenek & Eck, P.L.L.C. v. Law Firm of Malone Middleman, PC. Read the opinion of the Court — 635 Pa. 427
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided February 22, 2017·No. No. 397 WAL 2016; No. 398 WAL 2016·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 22nd day of February, 2017, the Cross Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

Whether the Superior Court erred in vacating the Judgment of the Court of Common Pleas with respect to Meyer Darragh’s quantum meruit claim when Meyer Darragh performed legal work and incurred expenses on behalf of the client and doing so would force Meyer Darragh to engage that client, who has already paid its legal fees in full, in litigation or allow Malone Middleman to be unjustly enriched.

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

Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebenek & Eck, P.L.L.C. v. Law Firm of Malone Middleman, PC, 166 A.3d 1236, 2017 Pa. LEXIS 419 (Pa. 2017).

166 A.3d 1236 (Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebenek & Eck, P.L.L.C. v. Law Firm of Malone Middleman, PC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.