Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

222 Pa. Super. 478

222 Pa. Superior Ct. 478

Holmes v. Broodno

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Submitted June 14, 1972.

Decided September 15, 1972.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1972-09-15

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 1978

6 state decisions

Relies on Meta v. Yellow Cab Co.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1972-09-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Before WRIGHT, P.J., WATKINS, JACOBS, HOFFMAN, SPAULDING, CERCONE, and PACKEL, JJ.

¶2*479Thomas Holmes Goldsmith, for appellant.

¶3Arthur J. Seidner, and Jerome Taylor and Associates, for appellee.

¶4OPINION BY PACKEL, J., September 15, 1972:

¶5The quashing of the appeal is reversed for reasons stated in Meta v. Yellow Cab Company of Philadelphia,222 Pa. Superior Ct. 469, 294 A. 2d 898 (1972).

¶6DISSENTING OPINION BY HOFFMAN, J.:

¶7I dissent for the same reasons as set forth in my opinion in Meta v. Yellow Cab Company of Philadelphia,222 Pa. Superior Ct. 469, 294 A. 2d 898 (1972).

¶8WATKINS and JACOBS, JJ., join in this dissenting opinion.

/222/pasuper/478 · .json · Public domain