Steiner v. Markel

955 A.2d 1013, 598 Pa. 208, 2008 Pa. LEXIS 1433

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Steiner v. Markel. Read the opinion of the Court — 600 Pa. 515 →

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided August 28, 2008·No. Appeal No. 74 MAL 2008·Published

Opinion

[209]*209 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 28th day of August, 2008, 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:

(1) Was it reversible legal error for the Superior Court to sua sponte raise the issue of whether a complaint contained a particular cause of action when that cause of action was never previously asserted before the trial court or on appeal?

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

[209]*209 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

(1) Was it reversible legal error for the Superior Court to sua sponte raise the issue of whether a complaint contained a particular cause of action when that cause of action was never previously asserted before the trial court or on appeal?

Steiner v. Markel, 955 A.2d 1013, 598 Pa. 208, 2008 Pa. LEXIS 1433 (Pa. 2008).

Pincite

955 A.2d 1013 (Steiner v. Markel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.