Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-7710,.. ~ William P. Douglas, Esq. Supreme Court I.D. J137926 Douglas Law Office 43 W. South St. Carlisle, PA 17013 Telephone (717) 243-1790_ Patricia Edwards In the Court of Common Pleas of Plaintiff Cumberland County, Pennsylvania vs No. 07 - 'j'r/~ Civil Term Daniel A. Edwards 365 W. Main St. Thurmont, MD 21788 Civil action law ,.Defendant Jury Trial Demanded Praecipe to Issue a Writ of Summons Dear Mr. Long: Please issue a writ of summons against the defendant, Daniel A. Edwards. - e _ William P. Dou las, Esq. Attorney ford laintiff v date: December 26, 2007 lJ i^ ~~( a~- ~ V ~" '~ ~~~ C. < ~ ,_ +~ ~ r' ~ ~. rr- ,. _ . F `fi ....- t ~ ~ Commonwealth of Pennsylvania County of Cumberland Patricia Edwards vs Daniel A. Edwards 365 W. Main St. Thurmont, MD 21788 In the Court of Common Pleas of Plaintiff Cumberland County, Pennsylvania No. 07 - 'f'r~~ Civil Term Civil action law Defendant Jury Trial Demanded Writ of Summons To: Daniel A. Edwards 365 W. Main St. Thurmont, MD 21788 You are hereby notified that Patricia Edwards has brought an action ag ' st you. /S ~• <~ ~~ date: December 26, 2007 William P. Douglas, Esq. Douglas Law Office 43 W. South St. Carlisle, PA 17013 717-243-1790 Attorney for Plaintiff Patricia Edwards vS Daniel A.. Edwards Case No. 2007-7710 Statement of Intention to Proceed To the Court: -Putric-1 Edwards intends to proceed with the Print Name William P. Douglas, Esq. Sign Name' Date: September 9, 2010 Attorney forP1aintif f 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 chll 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 Ru',e 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. II 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(c) 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 showing 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 anion 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. C un tioj?d ma ca tter ?, . p 5i; PA i?