Loading…

Search Pricing About Why now Resources Guides

Opinion

Bloom v. Borough of Philipsburg

524 Pa. 588 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 23, 1990

Full text

Leonard E. BLOOM, William H. Loose, and William M. Vogle v. BOROUGH OF PHILIPSBURG

ORDER PER CURIAM: Order affirmed. LARSEN, ZAPPALA and CAPPY, JJ., dissent.

Notice

Freecase is a legal research tool. It does not determine whether a case is good law and does not provide legal advice.

Metadata

Status: Published
Author
Judges: Cappy, Flaherty, Larsen, McDermott, Nix, Papadakos, Zappala
Cluster ID: 6393945

Citations

524 Pa. 588
1990 Pa. LEXIS 134
574 A.2d 602

Cited by

Huffman v. Borough of Millvale
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 26, 1991
Rosen v. Tesoro Petroleum Corp.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 8, 1990

Parentheticals

where counterclaim failed to allege any facts other than the “mere issuance of process for an unlawful purpose,” counterclaim did not sufficiently state a cause of action for abuse of process
Rosen v. Tesoro Petroleum Corp.

© 2026 freecase.aicontact@freecase.aiBuilt by lawyers. Powered by AI.

Freecase.ai provides legal information for educational and research purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Always consult a licensed attorney for legal guidance. Terms of Service

Bloom v. Borough of Philipsburg — freecase.ai