Rochester Machine Corp. v. Mulach Steel Corp.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
449 A.2d 1366 (Pa. 1982)
Facts
Mulach Steel Corp. (Mulach) (defendant) leased property from Rochester Machine Corp. (Rochester) (plaintiff). Near the end of the lease, Rochester sent a letter to Mulach containing an itemized list of damages that Mulach allegedly caused to the property and seeking payment for repairs. Mulach responded to each claim of damage, asserting that it “accept[ed] responsibility” for some of the damages and offering an explanation for others. Rochester sought to introduce evidence of these admissions at trial. The Court of Common Pleas of Beaver County admitted the evidence and a jury found in favor of Rochester. The Court of Common Pleas of Beaver County denied Mulach’s motion for a new trial. The Superior Court of Pennsylvania reversed and granted Mulach a new trial on the grounds that the admission evidence was improperly admitted. Rochester appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hutchinson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 709,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
