HomeMy WebLinkAbout97-6657 civilSANDRA E. PACE, !~,~ THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Administratrix of the Estate E:',, IMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Of DOROTHY $. PACE
DEANNA MURRAY, JOHN C.
MURRAY and CRAIG A. NO. 97-6~57 CIVIL TERM
DIEHL, Esquire
IN RE: DEFENDANT DIEHL'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before HOFFER~ P.J.~ OLER~ J. and GUIDO, J.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, January 18, 2000, after careful consideration of the parties'
briefs, the Court finds that material issues of fact remain as to the actions of the
parties. ~ Therefore, defendant Diehl's Motion for Summary Judgment is
denied.
y~t~e Court,
¢"' ~o~e [ Hoffer, f P.J.
~ Defendant Diehl also alleges that plaintiff cannot state a claim for legal malpractice without expert
testimony and that the answers to his interrogatories reflect that no expert will be retained. Defendant's
claim is premature for he must file a Rule to Show Cause seeking the identity of plaintiff's expert. If
plaintiff does not respond, only then can the Court preclude plaintiff from presenting an expert at tdal.
Only upon completion of this process can the Court conclude that plaintiff will not present an expert in
support of her claim.
Diane G. Radcliff, Esquire
3448 Trindle Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
For the Plaintiff
Brigid Q. Alford, Esquire
Jeffrey R. Boswell, Esquire
Boswell, Tintner, Piccola and Wickersham
315 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
For Defendant Diehl
Johnna J. Deily, Esquire
Saidis, Shuff and Masland
PO Box 560
Carlisle, PA 17013
For Defendants Murray