Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-5619HEATHER A. MILES, FORMERLY HEATHER A. DECKER, Plaintiff v TIMBER CHASE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION and TIMBER CHASE, A TOWNHOME CONDOMINIUM, Defendants AcA PO Prof, G ZZ C?c ,u PA 10 3 TO THE PROTHONOTARY: : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2003 CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRAECIPE Please issue a Writ of Summons in favor of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants. Please return the Writ of Summons to the undersigned for service. Respectfully submitted, Hubert X. Gilro squire Attorney for aintiff Broujos & droy, P.C. 4 North Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-4574 Supreme Court ID No. 29943 ?r.,l ?\/1 ? ?\ "? ?? i ?, .? v1l ,'? ? ? ? . ?'} r s Commonwealth of Pennsylvania County of Cumberland WRIT OF SUMMONS HEAHER A. MILES, formerly HEATHER A. DECKER Plaintiff Vs. Court of Common Pleas No. 03-5614 hi CivilAction-Law TIMBER CHASE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCAITION and TIMBER CHASE A TOWNSHOME CONDOMINIUM 1300 MARKET ST., PO BOX 622 LEMOYNE PA 17043 Defendant To TIMBER CHASE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION and TIMBER CHASE, A TOWNHOME CONDOMINIUM; You are hereby notified that HEATBHER A. MILES, formerly HEATHER A. DECKER, the Plaintiff has / have commenced an action in Civil Action-Law against you which you are required to defend or a default judgment may be entered against you. (SEAL) Date OCTOBER 24, 2003 Attorney: Name: HUBERT X. GILROY, ESQ. Address: 4 N. HANOVER ST CARLISLE PA 17013 Attorney for: Plaintiff Telephone: (717) 243-4574 Supreme Court ID No. 29943 CURTIS R. LONG Prothonotary By I A " a_? Deputy T HEATHER A MILES, formerly HEATHER A. DECKER vs Case No. 03-5619 TIMBER C'HARF CONDOMTNUM ASSOCIATION and TIMBER CHASE A TOWNSHOME CONDOMINIUM Statement of Intention to Proceed To the Court: liuhPrt- x CJ 1 rnV , FssluirP intends to proceed with he above captioned matter. Print Name Hubert X. Gilroy Sign Name 1,4 V/ Date: September 26, 2006 Attorneyfor Plaintiff Explanatory Comment The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governing the termination of inactive cases and amended Rule of Judicial Administration 1901. Two aspects of the recommendation merit comment. 1. Rule of civil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive cases within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for inactivity was previously governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 1901 and local rules promulgated pursuant to it. New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete procedure and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. This rule was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, 551 Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1104 (1998) in which the court held that "prejudice to the defendant as a result of delay in prosecution is required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing Rule of Judicial Administration 1901." Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. 11 Inactive Cases The purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system. The process is initiated by the court. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is with the parties. If the parties do not wish to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a party wishes to pursue the matter, he or she will file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a. Where the action has been terminated If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Rule230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely file the notice of intention to proceed. The timing of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is filed within thirty days of the entry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (d)(3) requires that the plaintiff must make a show in to the court that the petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of termination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivision (d)(2). B. Where the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the remedy of a common law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2. r-') 0 ?j%:;I ' i ? r[ ro rT <%° C-n HEATHER A. MILES, FORMERLY HEATHER A. DECKER, Plaintiff VS. TIMBER CHASE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION and TIMBER CHASE, A TOWNHOME CONDOMINIUM, Defendants TO THE PROTHONOTARY: : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2003-5619 CIVIL ACTION - LAW PRAECIPE Please mark the above captioned action "Settled and Discontinued". Respectfully submitted, Hubert X. ilroy, Esquire Martson aw Offices Attor s for Plaintiff 10 E igh Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-4574 ^ ?? / S. _J :.'.l .... .1 ?«.. e s ?. ?. .. b.