holding grant of summary judgment proper because defendant-property owners did not have responsibility to prevent or warn plaintiff about dangers presented by independent contractor's own negligence; allegedly dangerous condition was not pre-existing defect in owners' premises and evidence did not establish that owners had exercised control over operative details of work or condition of worksite
Summary of this case from McHugh v. Proctor Gamble1992
holding grant of summary judgment proper because defendant-property owners did not have responsibility to prevent or warn plaintiff about dangers presented by independent contractor's own negligence; allegedly dangerous condition was not pre-existing defect in owners' premises and evidence did not establish that owners had exercised control over operative details of work or condition of worksite
Summary of this case from McHugh v. Proctor Gambleholding that summary judgment was proper because decedent unequivocally knew that she had breast cancer over three years before suit was filed
Summary of this case from White v. Owens-Corning Fiberglastreating Motion to Compel Payment, filed after interrogatories had been served and answered, as a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 3147
Summary of this case from Goodstein v. GoodsteinFull title:DISPOSITIONS OF PETITIONS FOR ALLOWANCE OF APPEAL
Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Date published: Jan 1, 1992
It is well established in Pennsylvania that the owner of real estate is not liable, except in limited…
Youngren v. Presque Isle Orthopedic GroupThe discovery rule requires that the plaintiff know of the injury, its cause, and the causal relationship…