Featured Amicus Briefs
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/973ed/973ed7fca02b25c3daafd4adbc5a60bfacece0b3" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/52d47/52d470d26e0fb493dffee9a7d97bd59cab798f4b" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a7664/a7664760a818e34fa3c95176732f0fd7e9088700" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/867ff/867ff76f231dbf1e6bd32d97313571c0cb257539" alt=""
Sector: Business
Syngenta v. Douglass Nemeth
Brief of Amici Curiae Pennsylvania Coalition for Civil Justice Reform, American Property Casualty Insurance Association, Insurance Federation of Pennsylvania, and Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry Supporting the Petition for Allowance of Appeal
Status: Filed
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9e659/9e659578d52495f43e4a3501994a4e17a6978368" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9972b/9972b8fcd72fbc209c6722957ef778ddda4ad3b0" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/de83d/de83db39a843869d741d510370304d340fa1f28b" alt=""
Sectors: Business, Community
Mallory V Norfolk Southern -Update
To PCCJR great disappointment, a majority of the US Supreme Court has upheld the PA long arm statute requiring consent to jurisdiction to do business in PA. The PA Supreme Court declared the statute unconstitutional based on a line of US Supreme Court jurisdictional decisions involving due process.
PCCJR filed an amicus brief with the US Supreme Court in support of the PA Supreme Court’s holding in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern. This is a big blow to jurisdictional jurisprudence and due process. Now, companies with little to no substantial contacts with Pennsylvania will continue to be hauled into PA and of course, the Philadelphia court system.
Status: Filed
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f08b3/f08b31c28803280d7c84b2b842b107ecf550f95c" alt=""
Sectors: Business, Community
Axial v Alltranstek
Issue: Did the lower court’s award of attorneys fees violate the American Rule that a party is responsible for its own attorneys’ fees absent (1) an express statutory provision to the contrary; (2) a “clear” agreement – i.e., an unambiguous agreement capable of no other reasonable construction – to the contrary; or (3) some other established exception.
Status: Filed
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eea37/eea37d1a2e3d56eaceb149a2bffd93848285e9aa" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/26b3e/26b3ef960762dbdb446a8f2feb310091bd657d28" alt=""
Sectors: Business, Community, Health Care
DiNardo v UPHS
The issue is:
Does the felony murder rule prevent a convicted murderer from seeking damages in the form of compensation for injuries the convict allegedly sustained as the result negligent medical treatment, when such treatment allegedly did not prevent him from committing the act of murder?
Status: filed