Case Name: Ray KAISER and Kaiser Associates, Inc. v. Henry MEINZER, J. Walter Gallagher, Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company, Commonwealth Development and Construction Company, Chemical Bank, and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh and George Hyam, Additional Defendant. Appeal of COMMONWEALTH DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1979-04-27
Citations: 265 Pa. Super. 595
Docket Number: No. 1741
Parties: Ray KAISER and Kaiser Associates, Inc. v. Henry MEINZER, J. Walter Gallagher, Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company, Commonwealth Development and Construction Company, Chemical Bank, and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh and George Hyam, Additional Defendant. Appeal of COMMONWEALTH DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.
Judges: Before PRICE, SPAETH and LIPEZ, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports
Volume: 265
Pages: 595–597

Head Matter:
402 A.2d 705
Ray KAISER and Kaiser Associates, Inc. v. Henry MEINZER, J. Walter Gallagher, Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company, Commonwealth Development and Construction Company, Chemical Bank, and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh and George Hyam, Additional Defendant. Appeal of COMMONWEALTH DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
Argued March 22, 1979.
Decided April 27, 1979.
Petition for Allowance of Appeal Granted April 10, 1980.
Mitchell S. Greenspan, Philadelphia, for appellant.
Neil E. Jokelson, Philadelphia, for appellees Ray Kaiser and Kaiser Associates, Inc.
Before PRICE, SPAETH and LIPEZ, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
This appeal reaches us from an order of the court below entered May 15, 1978, striking a judgment entered in favor of appellant. Unfortunately, we do not have the benefit of an opinion as required by Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) and because of the complex nature of the issue involved we feel compelled to require compliance. Accordingly, we remand for an opinion, to be filed within thirty (30) days of this order.
Without limiting the matters to be expressed in said opinion, we direct the attention of the court below to its Order of March 27, 1978 and that the record does not disclose the taking of any exceptions to said Order by either party. Since the judgment here involved is in seeming conformity to the Finding Of The Court entered on March 27, 1978, the opinion should explain the striking of the judgment at least in that particular.
In addition to the remand for opinion it is directed that this appeal be consolidated for argument with the appeal presently in this Court at 1789 October Term, 1978.