Watkins v. Robinson
451 A.2d 266, 305 Pa. Super. 108, 1982 Pa. Super. LEXIS 5504
Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided October 8, 1982·No. Appeal No. 188·Published·Cited by 6 cases
Opinion
The procedural posture of this appeal is essentially identical to that of Johnson v. Keystone Insurance Company, 299 Pa.Super.Ct. 187, 445 A.2d 517 (1982). Accordingly, we shall vacate the order dismissing appellant’s complaint for noncompliance with the “240 Day Rule” and Philadelphia Rule of Civil Procedure 151, and remand the case to the court below for further proceedings consistent with the opinion in Johnson v. Keystone Insurance Company, supra.
Order vacated, and case remanded for further proceedings. Jurisdiction relinquished.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Watkins v. Robinson, 451 A.2d 266, 305 Pa. Super. 108, 1982 Pa. Super. LEXIS 5504 (Pa. Ct. App. 1982).
451 A.2d 266 (Watkins v. Robinson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Pennsylvania State Police v. Office of Open Records
5 A.3d 473 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2010)
Heffran v. Department of Corrections
878 A.2d 985 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2005)
Amro v. Office of Attorney General
783 A.2d 897 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2001)
Commonwealth v. Mines
680 A.2d 1227 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1996)
Scheetz v. Morning Call, Inc.
747 F. Supp. 1515 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1990)