Ball, et al v. Bayard Pump Co v. Marley Pump Co - (dissenting)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[J-107A&B-2011][M.O. McCaffery, J.] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : BAYARD PUMP & TANK CO., INC., GULF : OIL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, E.O. : HABHEGGER CO., INC., TITEFLEX : CORPORATION, VEEDER-ROOT CO., : SUSAN B. FRALICK BALL, LARRY G. COMISAK, KATHRYN S. COMISAK, RICHARD COWHIG, CAREN COWHIG, FLORENCE DAHM, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND THE ESTATE OF EDWARD DAHM, CHRISTINE FISHER, WARREN FISHER, BARBARA A. FRANKL, DAVID GLASS, ELAINE GLASS, JARED GLASS, ALMA R. JACOBS, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND THE ESTATE OF J. ALEXANDER JACOBS, EUGENE KATZ, LENORE KATZ, SUN E. KIM, JOAN KUCH, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND THE ESTATE OF LEONARD KUCH, JOHN MCCARRY, MARYBETH MCCARRY, JONATHAN MCCARRY, MATTHEW MCCARRY, PATRICK MCCARRY, JAMES J. MOORE, III, PATRICIA G. MOORE, LOUIS NICOLAI, BRUCE NICHOLS, BEATRICE NICHOLS, RICHARD K. OBERHOLTZER, WENDY OBERHOLTZER, MEGAN OBERHOLTZER, TAYLOR OBERHOLTZER, RICHARD H. SHEPHERD, JR., WENDIE STEFFENS, MARK STEFFENS, PAYTON THURMAN, JOAN THURMAN, D. JEAN TISDALL, SUSAN WALSH, KURT WEIDENHAMMER, DEBBIE WEIDENHAMMER, KAREN WEIDENHAMMER, MARYANN WRUBEL, METRO J. WRUBEL AND TODD WRUBEL v. No. 18 MAP 2011 Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court at No. 3061 EDA 2007 entered 10-30-2009, reconsideration denied 1228-2009, reversing and remanding the order of Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, Civil Division, at No. 99-06438 dated 10-10-2007. ARGUED: November 29, 2011 : : v. : : MARLEY PUMP COMPANY AND : CONTAINMENT TECHNOLOGIES : CORPORATION : : APPEAL OF: MARLEY PUMP COMPANY, : VEEDER-ROOT CO., E.O. HABHEGGER : CO. AND BAYARD PUMP & TANK CO., : INC. : : : SUSAN B. FRALICK BALL, LARRY G. : : COMISAK, KATHRYN S. COMISAK, : RICHARD COWHIG, CAREN COWHIG, : FLORENCE DAHM, ON BEHALF OF : HERSELF AND THE ESTATE OF : EDWARD DAHM, CHRISTINE FISHER, : WARREN FISHER, BARBARA A. : FRANKL, DAVID GLASS, ELAINE : GLASS, JARED GLASS, ALMA R. : JACOBS, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF : AND THE ESTATE OF J. ALEXANDER : JACOBS, EUGENE KATZ, LENORE : KATZ, SUN E. KIM, JOAN KUCH, ON : BEHALF OF HERSELF AND THE : ESTATE OF LEONARD KUCH, JOHN : MCCARRY, MARYBETH MCCARRY, : JONATHAN MCCARRY, MATTHEW : MCCARRY, PATRICK MCCARRY, : JAMES J. MOORE, III, PATRICIA G. : MOORE, LOUIS NICOLAI, BRUCE : NICHOLS, BEATRICE NICHOLS, : RICHARD K. OBERHOLTZER, WENDY : OBERHOLTZER, MEGAN OBERHOLTZER, TAYLOR : : OBERHOLTZER, RICHARD H. SHEPHERD, JR., WENDIE STEFFENS, : MARK STEFFENS, PAYTON THURMAN, : JOAN THURMAN, D. JEAN TISDALL, : SUSAN WALSH, KURT : WEIDENHAMMER, DEBBIE : WEIDENHAMMER, KAREN : WEIDENHAMMER, MARYANN WRUBEL, : WAGNER AND T.F.W., INC. No. 19 MAP 2011 Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court at No. 3061 EDA 2007 entered on 10-30-2009, reconsideration denied 1228-2009, reversing and remanding the order of Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, Civil Division, at No. 99-06438 dated 10-10-2007. ARGUED: November 29, 2011 [J-107A&B-2011][M.O. McCaffery, J.] - 2 METRO J. WRUBEL AND TODD WRUBEL v. : : : : : BAYARD PUMP & TANK CO., INC., GULF : OIL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, E.O. : HABHEGGER CO., INC., TITEFLEX : CORPORATION, VEEDER-ROOT CO., : WAGNER AND T.F.W., INC. : : v. : : MARLEY PUMP COMPANY AND : CONTAINMENT TECHNOLOGIES : : CORPORATION : : APPEAL OF: GULF OIL LIMITED : PARTNERSHIP AND THOMAS F. : WAGNER AND THOMAS F. WAGNER, : INC. DISSENTING OPINION MR. JUSTICE SAYLOR DECIDED: May 28, 2013 Eight years after Appellees filed their original complaint, and apparently after trial finally had been scheduled, defendants proposed trial-management plans which would upend Appellees conventional approach to the trial planning. Appellees reasonably requested that at least all members of the designated households of each designated plaintiff should be included in at least one trial phase. Not only was this request denied, Appellees were precluded from any mention, testimony and/or other evidence of claims of non-trial plaintiffs . . ., outside the mention of the same as part of the recitation of the history of the case. [J-107A&B-2011][M.O. McCaffery, J.] - 3 While I have differences with the breadth of the Superior Court s rationale vindicating Appellees position that imposition of the case management regime was an abuse of the trial court s discretion, I agree with Appellees that the wholesale division of households and associated limitations upon the evidence, at least, were unreasonable in the circumstances. Accordingly, I am unable to join the majority in overturning the result attained under the Superior Court s order. [J-107A&B-2011][M.O. McCaffery, J.] - 4

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.