Schaffer v. Larzelere

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “if the proposed amendment does not change the cause of action but merely amplifies that which has already been averred, it should be allowed even though the [s]tatute of [l]imitations has already run.”
• estopping invocation of statute of limitations where, “through fraud or concealment, the defendant causes the plaintiff to deviate from his right of inquiry”
• plaintiff permitted to proceed with wrongful death action after statute of limitations had run because defendants concealed facts surrounding decedent’s death
• if fraud or concealment by defendant causes plaintiff to relax vigilance or deviate from right of inquiry, defendant is estopped from invoking bar of limitation
• “An amendment introducing a new cause of action will not be permitted after 12 Pursuant to Commonwealth Court Internal Operating Procedure §414(a), 210 Pa. Code §69.414(a
• “An amendment introducing a new cause of action will not be permitted after the Statute of Limitations has run in favor of a defendant: ... This would constitute ‘resulting prejudice’ to the adverse party.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).