Kohl v. PNC Bank National Association & Schmidt, Appeal of PNC (Concurring And Dissenting Opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[J-129-2005] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT J. CARL KOHL : : v. : : PNC BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, : WILLIAM C. SCHMIDT AND MARILYN F. : SCHMIDT : : : : APPEAL OF PNC BANK NATIONAL : ASSOCIATION : : No. 89 MAP 2005 Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court entered October 28, 2004, at No. 1552 EDA 2003, which affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded in part the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County, Civil Division, entered April 16, 2003 at No. 6338 Civil 1998. 863 A.2d 23 (Pa. Super. 2004) ARGUED: December 5, 2005 CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION MR. JUSTICE SAYLOR DECIDED: December 27, 2006 I agree with the majority that the Superior Court articulated the correct legal standard, which follows naturally from Raker v. G.C. Murphy Co., 358 Pa. 339, 58 A.2d 18 (1948), and appropriately balances the need for access to the courts with a tenant s right to undisturbed possession. See Majority Opinion, slip op. at 22. For the reasons articulated by the Superior Court, however, I would additionally conclude that Kohl did not act in bad faith. See Kohl v. PNC Bank Nat l Assoc., 863 A.2d 23, 32-33 (Pa. Super. 2004). Accordingly, I would affirm the order of the Superior Court. I therefore respectfully dissent from the portion of the majority opinion remanding the case to the trial court for further proceedings.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
