Muhammad v. Strassburger, McKenna, Messer, Shilobod & Gutnick
598 A.2d 27, 528 Pa. 345, 1991 Pa. LEXIS 273
Opinion
And now, this 8th day of May, 1991, the Petitioners’, Pamela Muhammad, Administratrix for the Estate of Nazir *346 Muhammad and Abdullah Muhammad, petitions for reargument and for clarification are hereby DENIED.
It is so ORDERED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Muhammad v. Strassburger, McKenna, Messer, Shilobod & Gutnick, 598 A.2d 27, 528 Pa. 345, 1991 Pa. LEXIS 273 (Pa. 1991).
598 A.2d 27 (Muhammad v. Strassburger, McKenna, Messer, Shilobod & Gutnick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Flanagan, P. v. Hand, K.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2019
Mulligan v. Piczon
779 A.2d 1143 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2001)
Prande v. Bell
660 A.2d 1055 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 1995)
Spirer v. Freeland & Kronz
643 A.2d 673 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1994)
Filipovich v. J.T. Imports Inc.
637 A.2d 314 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1994)
Martos v. Concilio
629 A.2d 1037 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1993)
Collas v. Garnick
624 A.2d 117 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1993)
Miller v. Berschler
621 A.2d 595 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1993)
Gabel v. Cambruzzi
616 A.2d 1364 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1992)