Wicker v. Esposito

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Wicker v. Esposito

457 A.2d 1260, 500 Pa. 457, 1983 Pa. LEXIS 591

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJanuary 6, 1983

Docket8 E.D. Allocatur Docket 1983

StatusPublished

Cited by24 cases

This text of 457 A.2d 1260 (Wicker v. Esposito) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wicker v. Esposito, 457 A.2d 1260, 500 Pa. 457, 1983 Pa. LEXIS 591 (Pa. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

*458 ORDER

PER CURIAM:

And now to wit this 24th day of March, 1983, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is granted.

Having reviewed the record, we are satisfied that the right party was sued under a wrong designation. Thus, the permission of amendment in this case does not constitute the substituting of another and distinct party after the statute of limitations has run. Paulish v. Bakaitis, 442 Pa. 434, 275 A.2d 318 (1971).

Accordingly, the order of the Superior Court,-Pa. Super. -, 454 A.2d 160, affirming the order of the Court of Common Pleas is reversed. The matter is remanded to the trial court with direction that the petitioner be allowed to amend the complaint to correct the name, of the defendant therein.

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