From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wicker v. Esposito

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jan 6, 1983
500 Pa. 457 (Pa. 1983)

Summary

In Wicker v. Esposito, 500 Pa. 457, 457 A.2d 1260 (1983), our Supreme Court held that if an amendment constitutes a simple correcting of the name of a party, it should be allowed.

Summary of this case from Cossell v. Connellsville Tp. Bd., Supvr

Opinion

January 6, 1983.

Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia, Civil Division, No. 474 November, 1980.


ORDER


And now to wit this 24th day of March, 1983, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is granted.

Having reviewed the record, we are satisfied that the right party was sued under a wrong designation. Thus, the permission of amendment in this case does not constitute the substituting of another and distinct party after the statute of limitations has run. Paulish v. Bakaitis, 442 Pa. 434, 275 A.2d 318 (1971).

Accordingly, the order of the Superior Court, ___ Pa. Super.___, 454 A.2d 160, affirming the order of the Court of Common Pleas is reversed. The matter is remanded to the trial court with direction that the petitioner be allowed to amend the complaint to correct the name of the defendant therein.


Summaries of

Wicker v. Esposito

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jan 6, 1983
500 Pa. 457 (Pa. 1983)

In Wicker v. Esposito, 500 Pa. 457, 457 A.2d 1260 (1983), our Supreme Court held that if an amendment constitutes a simple correcting of the name of a party, it should be allowed.

Summary of this case from Cossell v. Connellsville Tp. Bd., Supvr
Case details for

Wicker v. Esposito

Case Details

Full title:Robert A. WICKER, Petitioner, v. Camerino ESPOSITO, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Jan 6, 1983

Citations

500 Pa. 457 (Pa. 1983)
457 A.2d 1260

Citing Cases

SMS Fin. CH v. Bolus Truck Parts & Towing, Inc.

Rule 1033 "allows parties to correct the name of a party at any time either with the consent of the adverse…

Dandridge v. Ne. Med. Ctr.

If the right party was sued under the incorrect name, and the moving party is not seeking the substitution of…