Frank Tufano case records naming Mark Powell
2 originating actions · 2 indexed records
Cases in this index naming Mark Powell
| Filed | Case | Court | Status / outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| February 18, 2025 | 2025-01448Tufano v. PPL Electric Utilities | Lackawanna County | Court granted both defendants' unanswered preliminary objections; Tufano appealed and settled with Frontier ($4,500), with a joint consent decree to dismiss Frontier filed but not yet confirmed entered by the court |
| January 27, 2025 | 2025-00706Tufano v. Motorworld | Lackawanna County | Dismissed with prejudice on defendants' preliminary objections; appeal pending |
A case appears here because a tracked record names this judge. The listing is not an evaluation of the judge or of any ruling.
Parties named in these cases
Related dispute groups
Court & ruling records
Records naming Mark Powell, tied to an order, opinion or report and recommendation.
Record labels distinguish final orders/opinions, reports and recommendations, non-final orders, and tentative/indexed ruling records. This lists records naming Mark Powell; it is not an evaluation of the judge.
Preliminary objections granted (unanswered)
Order dated 2025-04-21 (Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County, No. 2025-CV-1448) orders “that the unanswered Preliminary Objections filed by Respondents, PPL Electric Utilities Corporation and Frontier Utilities Northeast, LLC, respectively, are GRANTED.” Tufano (pro se) responded with a Notice of Appeal, Amended Notice of Appeal, Emergency Request for Injunctive Relief, and a Motion to Disqualify and Request for Jury Trial, all filed 2025-04-21/22.
April 21, 2025 ruling source — ic-access.com ↗Dismissal with prejudice on preliminary objections
Order dated 2026-01-07 (Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County, No. 25-CV-706) reads in full: "upon consideration of Defendants Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff's Complaint, and the response thereto, it is HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: 1. Preliminary Objections Nos. 1 and 2 filed by Defendants are SUSTAINED. 2. The Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE." Tufano (pro se) filed a Notice of Appeal on 2026-01-22 arguing he never received the preliminary objections because defendants' affidavit of service was fraudulent, during a period he says he was hospitalized for orbital reconstruction surgery; the appeal's outcome is not yet known.
January 7, 2026 ruling source — ic-access.com ↗Judge names are grouped conservatively using the workbook's judge-alias mapping. This page indexes public records naming this judge; it is not a judicial performance evaluation.