Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

EDMUND M. WENDLER v. MICHAEL R. DEPAUL (11/01/85)

filed: November 1, 1985.

EDMUND M. WENDLER, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
MICHAEL R. DEPAUL



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas, Civil Division, of Berks County at No. 234 July, 1984.

COUNSEL

Brooke M. Boyer, Reading, for appellant.

Daniel B. Huyett, Reading, for appellee.

Wickersham, Beck and Cercone, JJ.

Author: Wickersham

[ 346 Pa. Super. Page 480]

Edmund Wendler, Jr. appeals from the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County granting Michael DePaul's preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer and dismissing Wendler's complaint.

In July, 1984, Edmund Wendler, Jr., appellant herein, initiated this action by filing a complaint alleging defamation on the part of appellee Michael DePaul. Appellant's complaint alleged that appellant and appellee worked at the Carpenter Technology Corporation plant in Reading, Pennsylvania; appellant was a laborer and appellee was employed as the superintendent of the transportation, labor, and billet yard. Appellant further averred that on February 3, 1984, while appellant was working at the plant, a large piece of steel which he was moving in an overhead hoist fell and struck him on the foot. In response to this incident, appellee, appellant's superior, wrote a report containing statements which appellant alleged were "false, malicious and defamatory":

     a. That the incident occurred because [appellant] had willfully disregarded instructions in proper material handling procedures.

[ 346 Pa. Super. Page 481]

    b. That at the time of the incident, [appellant] had improperly attached the equipment to the piece of steel.

     c. That immediately prior to the incident another employee had ordered [appellant] to put the piece of steel down and properly connect the equipment and that [appellant] had refused to do so.

     d. That [appellant] refused to seek medical treatment for the injury.

     e. That Walter Johnson, a supervisor, indicated that [appellant] was not able to adequately ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.