Opinion

King v. United States Steel Corp.

432 Pa. 140
247 A.2d 563
1968 Pa. LEXIS 498

Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Filed: Nov 12, 1968
Status: Published
Author: Bell
On the bench: Bell, Brien, Cohen, Consideration, Eagen, Jones, Roberts, Took
Cited by: 23 cases

Distinguished

Distinguished by Roth v. Cabot Oil & Gas Corp., 919 F. Supp. 2d 476 (2013)
A review of King reveals that it is inapposite.
District Court, M.D. PennsylvaniaJan 30, 2013Read it

The opinion

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Bell:

I agree with the lower Court that the written lease (1) is clear and unambiguous and (2) only releases United States Steel Corporation from claims by Tenant for any injury, damage, etc., caused by or resulting *146 from any of its plants “on any part or all of the land [which Steel] presently occupied as or hereafter acquired for an addition to or replacement of the Fair-less Works of lessor.” Since the lease provides that lessor “shall not be liable in law, equity or otherwise to Tenant for any injury . . .,” it is a limited and not’ a general release of Steel.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.