The Pennsylvania Superior Court described its opinion in this case as a “cautionary tale for attorneys or venture outside their area of expertise into unfamiliar specialized area of litigation without educating themselves on the applicable rules and law.”
This case arose out of a medical malpractice claim.
In its decision, the Pennsylvania Superior Court reviewed the current status of the law on sanctions under Pa.R.C.P. 1023.1 Pa.R.C.P. 1023.4 and Pa.R.C.P. 1042.
In the end, the appellate court vacated the trial court's entry of sanctions in the amount of over $84,000 and remanded the case for further analysis of the request for sanctions under the standard of review outlined in this case.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK.
I send thanks to Attorney Daniel J. Siegel of the Law Offices of Daniel J. Siegel in Havertown, Pennsylvania for bringing this case to my attention.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK.
I send thanks to Attorney Daniel J. Siegel of the Law Offices of Daniel J. Siegel in Havertown, Pennsylvania for bringing this case to my attention.
Source of image: Photo by Sora Shimazaki from Pexels.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.