Civil Procedure

Interlocutory Appeals – When is the Right Time?

The term itself sounds alien – “interlocutory.” It refers to interim court decisions that usually aren’t appealable. Yet, the Pennsylvania Appeals Court Rules permit parties to appeal from some interlocutory rulings. The rub is when and how, two considerations lawyers may not think about or understand. Today, we won a case in which the Superior Court concluded that it could decide an interlocutory appeal based on Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 341(c).… Learn more. “Interlocutory Appeals – When is the Right Time?”

Read More

May I instruct the witness not to answer?

Even seasoned attorneys sometimes struggle with whether a communication is privileged or protected by the work product doctrine. Whatever the attorney decides can have significant implications in discovery and the trajectory of a case.

In Cohen v. Ellwood Crankshaft and Machine Co., No. 11212 C.A. 2016 (Pa. Ct. Comm. Pl.… Learn more. “May I instruct the witness not to answer?”

Read More

Plaintiffs Must Be Careful Using Social Media When Pursuing Injury Claims

According to recent surveys, two-thirds of all American adults use Facebook, with the majority using it on a daily basis. Social media platforms are ever-growing and changing, with 78% of people under the age of 24 now using Snapchat, and 71% using Instagram. Using these platforms to make statements or post photos has become second-nature for many, and you might not realize the risks of using social media if you are in the midst of a legal battle.Learn more. “Plaintiffs Must Be Careful Using Social Media When Pursuing Injury Claims”

Read More

Don’t let your claim turn into a pumpkin because you should have called a lawyer

The decision to file a lawsuit can be tricky. Generally, a person may only file a lawsuit within a limited time period, known as the statute of limitations. If you wait until the last minute, your claim might change from a lawsuit into a pumpkin on its way to the courthouse.Learn more. “Don’t let your claim turn into a pumpkin because you should have called a lawyer”

Read More

Third Circuit Scrutinizes Mailbox Rule

In a recent Opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has dramatically weakened the “mailbox rule,” which created a presumption that a letter was presumed to be received once the sender deposited it into a mailbox. It is about time that the courts examined this rule more closely, particularly in this day and age when it is possible to track the progress and delivery of every letter and every package.… Learn more. “Third Circuit Scrutinizes Mailbox Rule”

Read More

No Discovery of Communications Between Counsel and Experts

On July 10, 2014, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court erased any doubt that it intended to bar all discovery of communications between counsel and experts by amending Pa.R.Civ.P. 4003.5 to prohibit such communications. The amendment, effective August 9, 2014, confirms the Supreme Court’s Opinion in Support of Affirmance in Barrick v. Holy Spirit Hospital of the Sisters of Christian Charity, 91 A.3d 680, 689 (Pa.… Learn more. “No Discovery of Communications Between Counsel and Experts”

Read More

A Divided Pennsylvania Supreme Court Affirms That Communications Between Counsel and an Expert Are Not Discoverable

In the long-awaited decision in Barrick v. Holy Spirit Hospital, an evenly-divided Supreme Court today held that communication between counsel and an expert are privileged material pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 4003.3 and 4003.5. In so ruling, the three Justices supporting affirmance noted that “Rule 4003.3 balances the general rule of expansive discovery with the deep-rooted protection of attorney work product, and that “attempting to extricate the work product [provided to an expert] from the related facts will add unnecessary difficulty and delay into the discovery process.”

Learn more. “A Divided Pennsylvania Supreme Court Affirms That Communications Between Counsel and an Expert Are Not Discoverable”

Read More

Rules Change: Only Cite to the National Reporter System (A.2d or A.3d, for Example)

By Order dated April 14, 2014, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court eliminated the requirement that briefs include parallel citations to the state court cites. From now on, you only need to cite to the National Reporter System. This means you only need to cite to A.2d or A.3d Reporters, and not to Pa.… Learn more. “Rules Change: Only Cite to the National Reporter System (A.2d or A.3d, for Example)”

Read More

The Best Way to Learn What the Pa. Supreme Court is Doing May Be Twitter

Want to know what the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled on any given day? Or what else is happening in the Pennsylvania courts? If you do, you may think that the best way to do so is to visit the Court’s website every day. Guess what, that may not be the best way, as I have learned from discussions with the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts.… Learn more. “The Best Way to Learn What the Pa. Supreme Court is Doing May Be Twitter”

Read More

New Pa. Appellate Cases Tackle Medical Malpractice Jury Instructions and Delay Damages

Jury Instructions – Error in Judgment In Passarello v. Grumbine, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that an “error in judgment” jury instruction should never be given to the jury in a medical malpractice action. “If a defendant desires an instruction that conveys the principle that an unfortunate result does not by itself establish negligence, he or she may request from the trial court an instruction, in the appropriate case, that an unfortunate result does not be itself establish negligence.… Learn more. “New Pa. Appellate Cases Tackle Medical Malpractice Jury Instructions and Delay Damages”

Read More
RSS
Follow by Email