AUTOCHOICE UNLIMITED, INC. v. AVANGARD AUTO FINANCE, INC. d/b/a FRIEDMAN’S FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC d/b/a AFFM, INC., FRIEDMAN’S FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC

AUTOCHOICE UNLIMITED, INC. v. AVANGARD AUTO FINANCE, INC. d/b/a FRIEDMAN’S FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC d/b/a AFFM, INC., FRIEDMAN’S FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC AND AFFM, INC. No. 790 EDA 2010 2010 PA Super 221 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 12/1/2010
	Appeal from the Order entered February 4, 2010 in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): December Term, 2008 No. 2387
Before: STEVENS, DONOHUE, and MUNDY, JJ.
Opinion by: MUNDY, J.
Appellant, Autochoice Unlimited, Inc., appeals from an order entered February 4, 2010, sustaining in part Appellees’ preliminary objections and dismissing Appellant’s complaint without prejudice. Specifically, the trial court sustained Appellees’ objection to forum in Philadelphia on the basis of a forum selection clause contained in a contract between Appellant and Appellee Avangard Auto Finance, Inc. (Avangard), designating Broward County, Florida, as sole venue to resolve disputes. Because we discern no error or abuse of discretion by the trial court, we affirm.

-----------------------------------------------------Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

DIANE C. O’HARA AND JOSEPH O’HARA, H/W vs. THE FIRST LIBERTY INSURANCE CORP. D/B/A LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE GROUP

DIANE C. O’HARA AND JOSEPH O’HARA, H/W vs. THE FIRST LIBERTY INSURANCE CORP. D/B/A LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE GROUP No. 3054 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 214 Atlantic: n/a Petition for Reargument Filed 11/13/2009 Filed: 11/9/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered October 6, 2008 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil No. August Term 2008, No. 03032
Before: FREEDBERG, CLELAND and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: KELLY, J.
Diane C. O’Hara and Joseph P. O’Hara, Appellants, appeal from the order entered in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas sustaining the preliminary objection raised by The First Liberty Insurance Corp., d/b/a/ Liberty Mutual Insurance Group, Appellee, on the basis of venue and transferring the case to the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County. We affirm, finding that the trial court properly enforced the forum selection clause contained in the couple’s insurance policy.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

MICHELLE ZAPPALA v. THE JAMES LEWIS GROUP t/a BRANDOLINI COMPANIES, JAMES LEWIS CORPORATION, PROGRESS BANK, THE PEP BOYS-MANNY, MOE & JACK t/a PEP BOY

MICHELLE ZAPPALA v. THE JAMES LEWIS GROUP t/a BRANDOLINI COMPANIES, JAMES LEWIS CORPORATION, PROGRESS BANK, THE PEP BOYS-MANNY, MOE & JACK t/a PEP BOYS MICHELLE ZAPPALA v. BRANDOLINI PROPERTY MANAGEMENT INC., PAOLI SHOPPING CENTER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, PAOLI SHOPPING CENTER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP PHASE II, UNITED BUILDERS & ONSTRUCTORS, LTD., KORTAN GENERAL MAINTENANCE, INC., THE JAMES LEWIS GROUP t/a BRANDOLINI COMPANIES, JAMES LEWIS CORPORATION, PROGRESS BANK, THE PEP BOYS-MANNY, MOE & JACK t/a BRUBACHER EXCAVATING, INC., GREEN DESIGN, INC., CARROLL CONTRACTORS, INC., PICKERING VALLEY LANDSCAPE, INC., BALA ELECTRIC, HEYSER LANDSCAPING, INC., PAOLI SHOPPING CENTER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP II No. 313 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 179 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 9/11/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered October 2, 2007, Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Civil Division at No. August Term, 2000 – No. 00151 and October Term, 2000 – No. 03857
Before: PANELLA, DONOHUE and COLVILLE, JJ.
Opinion by: DONOHUE, J.
Appellant Michelle Zappala (“Zappala”) appeals from the trial court’s order entered October 2, 2007 granting Appellees’ motion pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1006(d)(1) to transfer this civil case from Philadelphia County to Chester County based upon forum non conveniens. As we discuss in detail, the case before us was remanded to the trial court by our Supreme Court and the forum non conveniens motion at issue is the Chester County Defendants’ second attempt to have this case transferred from Philadelphia to Chester County. On remand, Zappala, the Chester County Defendants, and the trial court each interpreted differently the teaching of our Supreme Court’s opinion in Zappala v. Brandolini Property Management, Inc., 589 Pa. 516, 909 A.2d 1272 (2006) (“Zappala I”). While we are in general agreement with the analysis employed by the learned trial judge, The Honorable Arnold L. New, we reverse because of a lack of an evidentiary record to support the trial court’s findings.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

CHRISTINE T. WALLS v. THE PHOENIX INSURANCE COMPANY

CHRISTINE T. WALLS v. THE PHOENIX INSURANCE COMPANY No. 1702 EDA 2008 2009 PA Super 93 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 5/19/2009
	Appeal from the Order entered May 28, 2008, in the Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Civil Division, January Term, 2008, No. 2057
Before: KLEIN, SHOGAN, JJ., and McEWEN, P.J.E.
Opinion by: McEWEN, P.J.E.
Appellant, Christine T. Walls, appeals from the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia transferring this case to the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County on grounds of forum non conveniens. We reverse.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - SHARON C. WILSON v. TERRI LEVINE, THE COACHING INSTITUTE AND COMPREHENSIVE COACHING U, INC.

SHARON C. WILSON v. TERRI LEVINE, THE COACHING INSTITUTE AND COMPREHENSIVE COACHING U, INC. No. 2943 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 284 Atlantic: 963 A.2d 479 Filed: 12/16/2008
	Appeal from the Order entered on October 12, 2007, in the Court of Common Pleas of Butler County, Civil Division, at No(s). A.D. No. 2006-10892.
Before: LALLY-GREEN, TAMILIA and COLVILLE, JJ.
Opinion by: LALLY-GREEN, J.
Appellant, Sharon C. Wilson (“Wilson”), appeals from the order entered on October 12, 2007, granting the petition and preliminary objections filed by the Appellees, Terri Levine, The Coaching Institute, and Comprehensive Coaching U, Inc. The order transferred venue from Butler County to Montgomery County. The order also sustained Appellees’ preliminary objections to Wilson’s amended complaint, and allowed her 20 days within which to file a second amended complaint. For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court - COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. DENNIS KEITH DIXON

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. DENNIS KEITH DIXON No. 1502 MDA 2007 2008 PA Super 241 Atlantic: 959 A.2d 399 Filed: 10/15/2008
	Appeal from the Order Entered August 8, 2007, Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County, Criminal Division, at No. CP-22-MD-0000790-2006
Before: GANTMAN, SHOGAN and KELLY, JJ.
Opinion by: SHOGAN, J.
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (“the Commonwealth”) appeals from the order entered on August 8, 2007, granting a motion for change of venue made by Dennis Keith Dixon (“Appellee”). For the following reasons, we vacate and remand.

-----------------------------------------------------
Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here

Superior Court 4/30/08 - CURT STIVASON v. TIMBERLINE POST AND BEAM STRUCTURES COMPANY

CURT STIVASON v. TIMBERLINE POST AND BEAM STRUCTURES COMPANY
No. 966 WDA 2007 2008 PA Super 88 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 4/30/2008
Appeal from the Order entered on April 25, 2007, in the Court of Common Pleas of Armstrong County, Civil Division, at No(s). 2006-1861 Civil
Before: LALLY-GREEN, PANELLA, and TAMILIA, JJ.
Opinion by: LALLY-GREEN, J.
Appellant, Curt Stivason (“Stivason”), appeals from the trial court’s order dated April 25, 2007, sustaining the preliminary objections asserting improper venue filed by Appellee, Timberline Post and Beam Structures Company (“Timberline”), and dismissing his complaint. We affirm.

Superior Court 4/16/08 - RICHARD A. DANZ v. CINDY L. DANZ

RICHARD A. DANZ v. CINDY L. DANZ
No. 1506 WDA 2007 2008 PA Super 70 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 4/16/2008
Appeal from the Order in the Court of Common Pleas of Potter County, Civil Division, No. 2007-97
Before: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J., MUSMANNO and TAMILIA, JJ.
Opinion by: TAMILIA, J.
Cindy L. Danz appeals the July 18, 2007, Order denying her Motion to Vacate or Open a Decree of Divorce.


On October 8, 2007, the trial court issued an Opinion wherein it concluded wife had waived her challenge to improper venue by failing to file preliminary objections. In reaching this conclusion, the trial court relied on Pa.R.C.P. 1920.1(b), Definitions. Conformity to Civil Action, which states: “Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the procedure in [a divorce] action shall be in accordance with the rules relating to a civil action.” The trial court also relied on Pa.R.C.P. 1006(e), Venue. Change of Venue, which provides in pertinent part: “Improper venue shall be raised by preliminary objection and if not so raised shall be waived.”

Our standard of review over an order denying a motion to open or vacate a divorce decree requires us to determine whether an abuse of discretion has been committed. Egan, supra at 407, quoting Foley v. Foley, 572 A.2d 6, 9 (Pa.Super. 1990) (additional citation omitted). A motion requesting that a divorce decree be opened or vacated lies when the motion alleges the decree suffers from a fatal defect apparent upon the face of the record, was procured by either intrinsic or extrinsic fraud, should be voided in light of newly discovered evidence, or was entered by a court without subject matter jurisdiction. 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 3332, Opening or vacating decrees.

Superior Court 3/31/08 - JOSEPH COHEN AND GALIT DADOUN-COHEN, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN THEIR OWN RIGHT AS CO-ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ESTATE OF ETHAN AMOS DAD

JOSEPH COHEN AND GALIT DADOUN-COHEN, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN THEIR OWN RIGHT AS CO-ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ESTATE OF ETHAN AMOS DADOUN COHEN, DECEASED v. KATHLEEN FURIN, MSW, CCE, MATERNAL WELLNESS CENTER, RONNIE ROTHMAN, CNM, JULIANNA THOMPSON, CNM, WOMAN WISE MIDWIFERY, ERIC CARLSON, D.O., MAIN LINE PERINATAL ASSOCIATES, A DIVISION OF WOMEN’S HEALTH CARE GROUP OF PENNSYLVANIA, LLC AND MAIN LINE HOSPITALS, INC., D/B/A LANKENAU HOSPITA
No. 1270 EDA 2007 2008 PA Super 52 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 3/31/2008
Appeal from the Order entered April 24, 2007 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Civil, No. 1401 February Term, 2007
Before: KLEIN, GANTMAN and ALLEN, JJ.
Opinion by: KLEIN, J.
Joseph Cohen and Galit Dadoun-Cohen (“Plaintiffs”), individually and as co-administrators of the estate of their son, Ethan Amos Dadoun-Cohen, appeal from a trial court order transferring their case from Philadelphia County to Montgomery County. We affirm.


First, Plaintiffs claim that Kathleen Furin and Maternal Wellness Center, Philadelphia co-defendants, rendered care that creates venue in Philadelphia. The Furin/Maternal Wellness defendants, primarily social service providers, did not render medical care in this case. Their alleged negligence is referring Mrs. Dadoun-Cohen, who had a high risk pregnancy, to midwives instead of a physician. However, making a referral is not “furnishing health care services” to establish venue under 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5101.1.

Second, Plaintiffs claim that there is venue created because when Mrs. Dadoun-Cohen first went into labor, she placed a phone call from Philadelphia to Ronnie Rothman of Woman Wise midwifery in Philadelphia. Plaintiffs claim Ms. Rothman negligently told them to cancel an ambulance and wait before going to the hospital in Montgomery County. Pennsylvania case law establishes that telephone communication does not constitute “furnishing health care services” in a county when the physical services are to be rendered in another county.

Third, Plaintiffs further claim error because the trial judge refused to allow additional discovery after he granted preliminary objections and transferred venue from Philadelphia to Montgomery County. Because Plaintiffs have an obligation to present all evidence to the trial judge at the time of the initial preliminary objections, it was not an abuse of discretion to deny further discovery after the ruling had been made.