Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 12/30/1994
Liles v. Balmer
Citations
- 653 A.2d 1237
- 439 Pa. Super. 238
- 1994 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3778
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that an individual who was not party to action is not aggrieved by the trial court order and has no standing to appeal
- discussing L. Packel & A. Poulin, Pennsylvania Evidence § 801.3 regarding non-hearsay “state of mind” testimony
- discussing L. Packel & A. Poulin, Pennsylvania Evidence § 801.3 regarding non-hearsay ‘state of mind’ testimony
- stating, “it is the contents of the motion and not its caption which is controlling”
- permitting nonsuit after preclusion of key testimony because plaintiff “had no remaining competent and relevant evidence to present on the issues of negligence and causation ... [and her] case was essentially complete prior to the entry of nonsuit”
- stating: \everyone whose name appears in the caption of a praecipe for writ of summons is not necessarily a party to the action; parties to an action are those who are named as such in the record and are properly served with process or enter an appearance\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Beck, Hudock, Brosky
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
11 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Hill v. OfaltSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2014-02-05· cited 123×
- In Re Child M.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1996-07-24· cited 107×
- Keffer v. Bob Nolan's Auto Service, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2012-11-26· cited 61×
- Blum Ex Rel. Blum v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1997-12-29· cited 54×
- In re the Adoption of R.K.Y.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2013-07-23· cited 44×
- Nobles, J. v. Staples, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2016-11-08· cited 39×
- Rachlin v. EdmisonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2002-12-13· cited 37×
- Murphy, P. v. International Druidic SocietySuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2016-12-08· cited 15×
- Rounick, D. v. Neducsin, D.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2020-04-20· cited 8×
- Engle v. Beaver CountyCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 2000-06-22· cited 3×
- Cook v. WirtzAlleghany County Court of Common Pleas· 1996-09-03· cited 1×
Cites
23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Smith v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1959-07-02· cited 362×
- Commonwealth v. NazarovitchSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1981-10-29· cited 141×
- Moore v. MooreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1993-11-05· cited 116×
- Matter of CunninghamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1988-02-25· cited 69×
- Sinclair by Sinclair v. BlockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1993-11-10· cited 55×
- Malinder v. Jenkins Elevator & MacHine Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1988-01-27· cited 52×
- Moran v. G. & W.H. Corson, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1991-01-25· cited 52×
- Harvilla v. DelcampSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1989-03-06· cited 47×
- Miller v. HurstSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1982-07-23· cited 44×
- Heddings v. SteeleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1987-05-29· cited 39×
- Liles v. BalmerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1989-12-11· cited 35×
- Smith v. BrooksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1990-05-24· cited 32×
- Commonwealth v. SmoyerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1984-05-30· cited 29×
- Florence Rumsey v. The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, IncThird Circuit· 1969-03-05· cited 28×
- Commonwealth v. ReedSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1990-12-06· cited 22×
- Taliferro v. Johns-Manville Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-12-09· cited 20×
- Walker v. WalkerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1987-04-02· cited 18×
- Cohen v. Jenkintown Cab Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1982-09-09· cited 18×
- Commonwealth v. GallowaySuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1994-04-12· cited 16×
- Newberg v. Board of Public EducationSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1984-07-20· cited 15×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.