Taylor v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that trial court abused its discretion in granting summary judgment where defendants moved for summary judgment on the morning of trial and after a jury had been empanelled thus depriving plaintiffs of adequate notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond
• absent written document, oral request for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 1085, which was rescinded and renumbered Pa. R.C.P. 1035.1 — 1035.5, is insufficient
• a plaintiff who is currently asymptomatic but develops a symptomatic asbestos-related disease in the future will later have a cause of action
• “It is within . . . within the appellate court’s discretion to review the issue unless the failure to raise the issue in the [concise] statement hinders appellate review.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).