Kraft v. Harris

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that prior lawsuit withdrawn on the eve of trial was a “last-second dismissal in the face of imminent defeat”
• holding that claims withdrawn on the day of trial resulted in a favorable termination to the Dragonetti Act plaintiff as “neither clients nor attorneys were attempting to properly adjudicate the claim”
• holding, in a Dragonetti case, expert testimony not required in actions where “[a]ppellants make no contention the issues were complex or beyond the knowledge of the average person”
• finding that when a defendant “made no contention the issues were complex or beyond the knowledge of the average person…there was no need for expert testimony on the issue of professional negligence”
• finding sufficient evidence existed to support the jury's finding that the defendants had filed the underlying lawsuit against the plaintiff for an improper purpose
• noting examples of improper purpose include bringing a claim known to be invalid to “harass the person proceeded against” or to prevent someone from exercising their First Amendment rights

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).