Wednesday, August 14, 2024

default judgment - opening - citing meritorious preliminary objection

Lin v. Bernard – Pa. Super. – 8-12-24 – non-precedential***

 

https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Superior/out/J-A07028-23m%20-%20106033356277194969.pdf?cb=1

 

Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 237.3, a court “must grant a petition to open a default judgment where the petitioner attaches one or more preliminary objections.” In this contract case, the plaintiff didn’t plead whether the contract was oral or written, and if written, failed to attached the writing.

 

+++++++++++++++++++

 

*** Superior Court – citing non-precedential decisions

https://www.pacodeandbulletin.gov/Display/pacode?file=/secure/pacode/data/210/chapter65/s65.37.html&d=reduce

B.  Non-precedential decisions filed after May 1, 2019, may be cited for their persuasive value, pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 126(b). 

 

 

 

Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act - oral notice of cancellation is effective

Commonwealth v. Gillece Services - Cmwlth. Court - 7-3-24 - reported case

https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/861CD23(2)_7-3-24.pdf?cb=1

 

In a case of  first impression, the court held that a home improvement contractor must honor an oral  cancellation request from a customer. The written notice requirement under the UTP/Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. sec. 201-1 et seq.,  does not apply to the Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act, 73 P.S. sec. 517.1, et seq.