Skip to main content
· 1/28/1992

Melat v. Melat

Citations

  • 602 A.2d 380
  • 411 Pa. Super. 647
  • 1992 Pa. Super. LEXIS 150

How courts have described this case

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

  • “A modification does not displace a prior valid contract; rather, the new contract acts as a substitute for the original contract, but only to the extent that it alters it. The original contract may be abrogated in part, with the residue remaining intact.”
  • summary judgment standard of review

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: McEwen, Olszewski, Cercone

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.