Peacock Tales • Fall 2010

Brief Notes

  1. Rule 1029(i) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure which was added in 2000, requires that where a claim is based on a writing, the complaint must have attached a copy of that writing. Several Courts of Common Pleas have applied the rule to suits brought by credit card companies and have ruled that the companies’ suits against cardholders are insufficient because they cannot produce the written agreement with the credit cardholder.
  2. The Eastern District Court of Pennsylvania required two attorneys who acted inappropriately in a deposition, to:
    1. Attend a continuing legal education course on “civility” and “professionalism;” and
    2. “Join each other for an informal meal... to... repair their professional relationship.”
  3. The Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas held that a cab company was not liable to a family of the inebriated pedestrian who was killed crossing a highway where the cab company failed to dispatch a cab to transport the pedestrian.
  4. The Pennsylvania Superior Court held that a drunken man, who may have had the right of “flight” from a barroom fight by driving while intoxicated, was not justified driving 4 1/2 miles before crashing.
  5. The Eastern District Court of Pennsylvania enjoined the former Vice President of Thomas English Muffins from working for Hostess because of a likely disclosure of trade secrets.
  6. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that genetically defective sperm could not be the basis of a products liability suit alleging wrongful life.
  7. A Philadelphia jury acquitted a defendant of murdering a policeman who he had shot more than forty years earlier. The prosecution had contended that the officer’s death was a result of the shooting decades ago.

< Back

Peacock Keller, LLP • 70 East Beau Street • Washington, PA 15301 • 724-222-4520