lN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANlA
EASTERN D|STR|CT

GREGORY R. ZAPPALA, 1 No. 443 EAL 2012

Petitioner  Petition for A||owahce of Appea| from the
: Order of the Superior Court
v. :

CAROSELL| BEACHLER |\/|CT|ERNAN & 1
CONBOY, W|LL|A|\/| R. CAROSELL|,
ESQU|RE, T||\/|OTHY CONBOY,
ESQU|RE, SUSAN A. |V|ERED|TH,
ESQU|RE, KELLY L. ENDERS,
ESQU|RE, DAV|D S. SENOFF,
ESQU|RE, LAUREN C. FANT|N|,
ESQU|RE, R|CHARD C.
DEFRANCESCO, ESQU|RE, CEFALO &
ASSOC|ATES, |\/||CHAEL J. CEFALO,
ESQU|RE, JA|\/|ES J. ALBERT,
ESQU|RE, GEORGE G. OSCHAL, |||,
ESQU|RE, KARL J. KWAK, ESQU|RE,
AND L|NDA L. BARTLETT, ESQU|RE,

Respondents
GREGORY R. ZAPPALA, : No. 444 EAL 2012
Petitioner  Petition for A||owahce of Appea| from the

: Order of the Superior Court
v. :

ECKERT SEA|\/|ANS CHER|N &
|\/|ELLOTT, LLC, BR|DGET E.
|V|ONTGO|V|ERY, ESQU|RE, DAV|D J.
SCHERTZ, ESQU|RE, R|KER DANZ|G
SCHERER HYLAND & PERRETT|, LLP, .
AND |\/||CHAEL P. O'|\/|ULLAN, ESQU|RE, 1

Respondents

GREGORY R. ZAPPALA, 1 No. 445 EAL 2012

Petitioner  Petition for A||owahce of Appea| from the
: Order of the Superior Court
v. :

|\/|ETZGER & KLE|NER, DAN|EL E.
KLE|NER, ESQU|RE, AND R|CHARD G.
FREE|V|AN, ESQU|RE,

Respohdeht
GREGORY R. ZAPPALA, : No. 446 EAL 2012
Petitioner  Petition for A||owahce of Appea| from the

: Order of the Superior Court
v. :

ANAPOL SCHWARTZ WE|SS COHAN
FELD|\/|AN & S|\/|ALLEY, P.C., SOL H.
WE|SS, ESQU|RE, A|\/|BER |\/|. RAC|NE,
ESQU|RE, ADR|ANNE WALVOORD,
ESQU|RE, LAW OFF|CE OF BARRY H. .
DYLLER, BARRY H. DYLLER, ESQU|RE, 1
GELB LAW F|R|\/|, AND JOHANNA L.
GELB, ESQU|RE,

Respondents
GREGORY R. ZAPPALA, : No. 447 EAL 2012
Petitioner  Petition for A||owahce of Appea| from the

: Order of the Superior Court
v. :

HANGLEY ARONCH|CK SEGAL &

PUDL|N, DAN|EL SEGAL, ESQU|RE,
REBECCA L. SANTORO, ESQU|RE,

[443 EAL 2012, 444 EAL 2012, 445 EAL 2012, 446 EAL 2012 and 447 EAL 2012] - 2

JUVEN|LE LAW CENTER, |\/|ARSHA L.
LEV|CK, ESQU|RE, AND LOURDES |\/|.
ROSADO, ESQU|RE,

Respondents

ORDER

PER CUR|AM

AND NOW, this €th day of August 2014, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is
GRANTED, L|M|TED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DEN|ED as to all

remaining issues. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is:

Whether the voluntary and unilateral dismissal of Petitioner without
prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) was a termination of the
underlying proceedings in Petitioner's favor, such that Petitioner could
state a claim in a Dragonetti action?

l\/lr. Justice Saylor, l\/ladame Justice Todd and l\/lr. Justice l\/lcCaffery did not

participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

[443 EAL 2012, 444 EAL 2012, 445 EAL 2012, 446 EAL 2012 and 447 EAL 2012] - 3

