Khalil v. Travelers Indem. Co. of Amer.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled that the doctrine of res judicata barred the plaintiff’s claims. Appellant sought monetary damages against Appellees, including Travelers, Pier 3, Wentworth, and the attorneys who represented these parties in two prior actions. The trial court granted Appellees’ motion for summary judgment. The Superior Court affirmed. “Res judicata protected Travelers because Appellant could have raised fraud in the water damage action but failed to do so until long after the case was marked settled, discontinued, and ended. Similarly, res judicata protected Pier 3 and Wentworth because Appellant could have raised fraud in the Pier 3 action, but (1) she failed to do so before trial, and (2) while she raised fraud in post-trial motions, she abandoned this claim during her appeal to the Commonwealth Court. Finally, res judicata protected the attorneys because they were in privity with the non-attorney Appellees during the water damage and Pier 3 actions.”

Search entire site by keyword...

Search for Summaries by Hashtag...

Past Opinion Summaries