Ravitch v. Pricewaterhouse

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that “an action filed in another state does not toll the running of the statute of limitations as to an action in Pennsylvania”
• finding that “an action filed in another state does not toll the running of the statute of limitations as to an action in Pennsylvania”
• noting that, in Pennsylvania, the filing of an action in state court does not toll the statute of limitations against a subsequent action filed in federal court
• denying cross-jurisdictional tolling after examining jhe split in authority and finding Portwood’s “reasoning persuasive.’
• “Failure to include an issue in a 1925(b) statement waives that issue for purposes of appellate review.”
• “In Pennsylvania, an individual action filed in federal court does not toll the running of the statute of limitations as to an action in state court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).