Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Pennsylvania » Superior Court » 1998 » Techtmann v. Howie (Complete Opinion)
Techtmann v. Howie (Complete Opinion)
State: Pennsylvania
Court: Supreme Court
Docket No: 1826 PHL 98
Case Date: 11/05/1998
Plaintiff: Techtmann
Defendant: Howie (Complete Opinion)
Preview:J. M04003/98

RICHARD M. TECHTMANN and  :  IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF  
MONICA TECHTMANN, Appellees  : :  PENNSYLVANIA  
:  
:  
v.  :  
:  
ROY J. HOWIE, ROBERT GRAY'S SONS, INC., Individually and t/a GRAY TRUCKING and GRAY TRUCKING, SCANFORMS INC. Individually and t/a SCANFORMS COMPANY and SCANFORMS COMPANY, MATERIAL HANDLING EQUIPMENT COMPANY, Individually and t/a MODERN GROUP, LTD., and MODERN GROUP, LTD., ADVANCED LIFTS, INC. and ADVANCED LIFT DESIGNS, INC.,  : : : : : : : : : :  
.  
:  
APPEAL OF: ROBERT GRAY'S SONS, INC., ROY HOWIE AND GRAY TRUCKING  : :  
:  No. 1826 Philadelphia 1998  

Appeal from the Order dated April 27, 1998
in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County,
Civil Division, at No. 1637 February Term 1995.

BEFORE:  KELLY, POPOVICH and ORIE MELVIN, JJ.
OPINION PER CURIAM:  FILED: November 5, 1998

Appellants are before this Court seeking review of the April 27, 1998 order of the trial court denying the appellants' Petition for Leave to Join an Additional Defendant.  The appellees have filed a motion to quash the appeal as interlocutory. The issue is whether this order is properly on appeal.  After careful consideration, we find this appeal is not from a final order nor is it permitted by statute, and thus we are compelled to grant the motion to quash.
J. M04003/98

Procedurally, it appears from the record that on February 15, 1995 appellees Richard and Monica Techtman instituted an action against nine defendants, including Appellants Roy Howie, Robert E. Gray's Sons, Inc., individually and trading as Gray Trucking and Gray Trucking seeking to recover damages for personal injuries. Mr. Techtman, a postal clerk, alleges on March 23, 1993 while he was working at a loading dock at the Bristol Pennsylvania Post Office his hand became pinned between a hydraulic lift and a truck. The lift was operated by appellant Roy J. Howie, an employee of appellant Robert E. Gray's Sons, Inc. In the course of treatment for his injuries, Mr. Techtman required five surgical procedures to his hand. After the last surgery, which was performed by James M. Hunter, M.D., the condition of the hand and arm worsened. In response to Appellants' Request for Production of Documents, Appellees' counsel turned over a report by Richard H. Bennett, M.D., dated October 19, 1994, made in connection with Mr. Techtman's Workers Compensation claim, in which Dr. Bennett criticized the treatment rendered by Dr. Hunter. Appellants also have a report from their own expert, Dr. Askin, expressing criticism of Dr. Hunter's treatment.
This case took a procedural detour when the trial court issued an order transferring the case from Philadelphia County to Bucks County. However, our Supreme Court granted an allowance of appeal and on September 16, 1997 the trial court's order was reversed and the case was remanded to

J. M04003/98

Philadelphia County for further proceedings. An application for reconsideration was denied, and the record was remanded on January 14, 1998.  On January 26, 1998, defendant Advanced Lifts, Inc. again moved for a transfer of venue to Bucks County, and Appellees responded with a Motion for Sanctions.
Appellant Robert E. Gray's Sons, Inc. filed a Motion for Leave to Join Additional Defendant James M. Hunter, M.D. The record reflects that on April 27, 1998 the trial court denied all outstanding motions.  Appellants filed two applications requesting certification of the trial court's order denying change of venue and denying Leave to Join Additional Defendant for an immediate interlocutory appeal. On June 23, 1998 both applications were denied by the trial court. It is from the April 27, 1998 order which specifically denies the Motion of Appellant Robert Gray's Sons, Inc., for Leave to Join Additional Defendant (James M. Hunter, M.D.) that this appeal is filed.
Before this Court can review any trial court's order, we must determine whether it is properly before us. It is well settled that an appeal will lie only from a final order unless otherwise permitted by statute. Robec, Inc. v. Poul, 681 A.2d 809 (Pa. Super. 1996). 42 Pa. C.S.A.
Download m04003.pdf

Pennsylvania Law

Pennsylvania State Laws
Pennsylvania Tax
Pennsylvania Labor Laws
Pennsylvania State
Pennsylvania Agencies
    > Pennsylvania Secretary of State

Comments

Tips