1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Pa.Super.
  4. 383 Pa.Super.
  5. 383 Pa.Super. 590 (1989)
 

CARELLI v. PA. MED. SOC. LIABILITY INS. CO.

383 Pa.Super. 590 (1989)

557 A.2d 409

John CARELLI and Kathleen Carelli, Individually and as Husband and Wife, Appellants, v. PENNSYLVANIA MEDICAL SOCIETY LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY, Dr. Saul R. Berg, Dr. Alan J. Silverstein and Dr. Robert C. Rankin, Appellees. Jeannette Tibbens HORNER v. Joan O. MELVIN, Chief Magistrate, City of Pittsburgh Housing Court, Richard Bruce, Code Enforcement Administrator of the City of Pittsburgh and Brian Hill, Senior Building Inspector of the City of Pittsburgh, Bureau of Building Inspection, Appellees. Appeal of Jeannette Tibbens HORNER and Allen N. Brunwasser, Appellants. Allen N. BRUNWASSER, Appellant, v. PRESBYTERIAN-UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH, Michael Karpf, M.D., Henry Booth Higman, M.D., University Neurological Associates, Inc., Presbyterian-University Systems, Inc., Presbyterian-Health Resources Mgt., Inc., Internal Medicine Specialists, P.C. Steven B. Larchuck, Esquire and Dickie, McCamey and Chilcote, a Professional Corporation, Appellees. Charlotte SCHWARTZ, Appellant, v. CONCORD-LIBERTY SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION and Eugene Coon, Sheriff of Allegheny County Pennsylvania Appellee.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Filed February 14, 1989.

Reargument Denied April 13, 1989.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Allen N. Brunwasser, Pittsburgh, for Carelli, appellants (at 1571); for Horner, appellant (at 25); for Brunwasser, in propria persona, appellant (at 25, 26); and for Schwartz, appellant (at 675).

Lynn E. Bell, Pittsburgh, for PA Medical Society, appellees (at 1571).

Nancy E. Gilberg, Philadelphia, for Melvin, appellee (at 25).

Gretchen G. Donaldson, Pittsburgh, for Bruce and Hill, appellees (at 25).

Bonnie Webster, Pittsburgh, for Presbyterian-University Hosp., appellees (at 26).

Arnold M. Epstein, Pittsburgh, for Concord-Liberty and Coon, appellees (at 675).

Before ROWLEY, DEL SOLE and HESTER, JJ.

DEL SOLE, Judge:

These consolidated appeals follow the dismissal of Appellants' complaints. We affirm.

Appellants argue that the trial court orders dismissing their complaints were in error because the trial court imposed "nit-picking" pleading standards rather than overlooking what were merely examples of "inartful pleading." We disagree. Pa.R.C.P. 126 provides as follows:

The rules shall be...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases