Search for: "A. J. Kramer" Results 41 - 60 of 402
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Dec 2009, 7:47 am by Al Nye
Movie Therapy For Law Students (And Pre-Law, Paralegal, And Related Majors) By Sonia J. [read post]
2 Aug 2018, 5:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
 Anyone wishing to review this case may click this LINK.I send thanks to Attorney Scott Cooper of the Harrisburg, PA office of Schmidt Kramer for bringing this case to my attention. [read post]
12 Feb 2020, 5:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins, Esq.
Cooper of the Harrisburg, Pennsylvania law firm of Schmidt Kramer, P.C. for bringing this case to my attention. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 5:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
March 17, 2015 Charles, J.), Judge Bradford Charles ruled in response to a defense discovery motion for a protective order that, during a neuropsychological IME, the Plaintiff's attorney would be allowed to be present during the preliminary interview phase by the doctor of the Plaintiff.However, the court also ruled that once the standardized testing portion of the neuropsych IME began, no one other than the doctor and the Plaintiff would be allowed in the room and no recording… [read post]
16 Jul 2018, 5:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
   Please click this LINK to view this decision online.I send thanks to Attorney Scott Cooper, Esquire of the Harrisburg, PA office of Schmidt Kramer for bring this case to my attention. [read post]
3 Mar 2020, 7:30 pm by Daniel E. Cummins, Esq.
Feb. 27, 2020 Beetlestone, J.), the Court followed the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's sweeping decision in Gallagher and likewise held that the household exclusion was eradicated across the board.The court in Stockdale rejected the insurance company's argument that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Opinion in Gallagher v. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 5:00 am
Cooper of the Harrisburg, PA law firm of Schmidt Kramer for bringing this case to my attention. [read post]
9 Aug 2019, 5:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
J.), the Court held that there is no subrogation allowed against a third party tort recovery by a Plaintiff in a motor vehicle accident case when the benefits that were previously paid to the injured Plaintiff by the lienholder were Heart and Lung Benefits. [read post]
23 Feb 2017, 8:34 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Op. by Baer, J.), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court addressed the the validity of a Section 1731 uninsured and underinsured rejection form. [read post]
12 Aug 2014, 6:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Anyone wishing to review this first party decision may click HERE.I send thanks to Attorney Scott Cooper of the Harrisburg law firm of Schmidt Kramer for bringing this case to my attention. [read post]
2 Aug 2018, 6:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
   Anyone wishing to review this case may click this LINK.I send thanks to Attorney Scott Cooper, Esquire of the Harrisburg, PA office of Schmidt Kramer for bring this case to my attention. [read post]
20 Jun 2019, 5:58 am by Daniel E. Cummins
  June 17, 2019 Beetlestone, J.), basically same holding but with a slightly different rationale than the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Memorandum and Order in Butta v. [read post]
7 May 2013, 5:15 am by Daniel E. Cummins
April 26, 2013 Ludwig, J.) dismissed a bad faith claim in an underinsured (UIM) motorists case. [read post]
18 Nov 2020, 3:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins, Esq.
I also send thanks to Attorney Scott Cooper of the Harrisburg, PA law firm of Schmidt Kramer for his efforts to get me involved in the creation of this year's edition of the Journal. [read post]