Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-3234IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. (X -3.231f X? Civil Action - (X) Law ( ) Equity DAWN REEDER PRANOM B. DAVIS and 6107 LINGANOLE ROAD ELMER DAVIS, her husband FREDERICK, MD 21701, 507 CLOUSER HOLLOW ROAD NEW BLOOMFIELD, PA 17068, Plaintiff Defendants VS. Plaintiff(s) & Addresses Defendant(s) & Addresses PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Please issue writ of summons in the above-captioned action. X Writ of Summons shall be issued and forwarded to ( )Attorney (X)Sheriff JOSEPH J. DIXON, ESQUIRE ogrdWof Attorney 126 STATE STREET X /1 HARRISBURG, PA 17101 (717) 236-8515 Supreme Court ID No.28290 Names/Address/Telephone No. Of Attorney Date: May 21, 2009 WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANT(S): PRANOM B. DAVIS AND ELMER DAVIS YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLAINTIFF(S) HAS E COMMENCED AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. rothono Date: May 21 2009 b y Deputy ( ) Check here if reverse is issued for additional information. .s? 2 ?9 F A 't 21 F:ij 12: ass-e:9? Sheriffs Office of Cumberland County R Thomas Kline $x0j of €umbrr Edward L Schorpp Sheriff P° ? Solicitor Ronny R Anderson Jody S Smith Chief Deputy OMCE OF TtG SHERIFF Civil Process Sergeant SHERIFF'S RETURN OF SERVICE 05/21/2009 R. Thomas Kline, Sheriff who being duly swom according to law states that he made a diligent search and inquiry for the within named defendant, to wit: Pranom B. Davis, but was unable to locate her in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the Sheriff of Perry County, PA to serve the within Writ of Summons according to law. 05/21/2009 R. Thomas Kline, Sheriff who being duly swom according to law states that he made a diligent search and inquiry for the within named defendant, to wit: Elmer Davis, but was unable to locate him in his bailiwick. He therefore deputized the Sheriff of Perry County, PA to serve the within Writ of Summons according to law. 05/27/2009 08:14 AM - Perry County Return: And now May 27, 2009 at 0814 hours I, Carl E. Nace, Sheriff of Perry County, Pennsylvania, do herby certify and return that I served a true copy of the within Writ of Summons, upon the within named defendant, to wit: Elmer Davis by making known unto Pranom B. Davis, adult in charge at 507 Clouser Hollow Road New Bloomfield, PA 17068 its contents and at the same time handing to her personally the said true and correct copy of the same. 05/27/2009 08:14 AM - Perry County Return: And now May 27, 2009 at 0814 hours I, Carl E. Nace, Sheriff of Perry County, Pennsylvania, do herby certify and return that I served a true copy of the within Writ of Summons, upon the within named defendant, to wit: Pranom B. Davis by making known unto herself personally, defendant at 507 Clouser Hollow Road New Bloomfield, PA 17068 its contents and at the same time handing to her personally the said true and correct copy of the same. SHERIFF COST: $53.44 May 29, 2009 SO ANSWER R THOMAS KLINE, SHERIFF 2009-3234 Dawn Reeder v Prano[n B. & Elmer Davis C -- '' 0 3 ,-. ~ lti- ~ ~ ~ -, -- _ _ _, - __ ~,,~ - ,~ _.. Case No. G? ~ `. -~',._ N e~ ,-~ E-- - '~ ~t r... ~ v cT- o 0 Statement of Intention to Proceed ir-~ ~~ ~-~ Cs a' 3 ~-n ~ -- 2p ~ ~ etc i ~ U the COUI"t: ~ ~ }"'">. "U . , _..,~ C1n intends to roceed with the above captioned matter. '~ _._ _ _~- Print~lame~ G~ ~; ~ ~ ~'Gr~~Sign Name '~ L""~~ - ~- ~~-- .a_~= _ _ __ _ ,i~.~ :~ ... ~i . ~~ t)ate: ~~~~ Attorne,~for y~,~~•~- ~~%Li~-~-__-- Explanatory Comrnent the S~aprcme Court of Pcnnsvlvania has promulgated new Rule of C'ie~il Procedure 230.2 governing th~.~ termination of inacti~ c cases and amended Rule of .ludicial Administration 1901. l•svo aspects of the recommendation merit ~xmuncn~ I. Rule r~1 civil Proc•ee~'ure New Rule oh Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govu~n the termination of inactive c<cscs within the >cope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The tcnnination of these caves for inactivity ~.eas previously ~o~erned b~~ Rule ol'.~udicial Administration 1901 and local rules promulgated pursuant to it. New Rule 230? is ~ailured to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete procedure and a uniform statewide practice. preempting i)Ca~ IUia. ~I-his rule was pron~~ulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme: Court in Shop v. 1?agle, ~~ l Pa 3b~~.71U ;~?d 110=1 i 1998) in evhich the court held that "pr~judicc to the defendant as a result oh delay in prosecutian is required hcli~rc a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing Rulc of .ludicial ,ldminislration 190L•~ Rule of .ludicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. 'hhe ~cneral tx~licy of the prompt disposition ol~ matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. I I luc~wii c~ (a.crs ~I~hr purpose of Rele 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from Llac judicial system. The process is ir~itiatcd by the court. :tiler ~~i~ing notice of intent to terminate an action f~~r inactivity. the course ol'the procedure is w,~ith :he parties. l the parties do not ~,yish to pursue the: case. they will take no acti~.>n and °the Prothonotary shall inter an order as of course tcrminatin~ the matter ~~-ith prejudice ibr failure to prosecute.'- If a party wishes to pursue the nrUtc:~. he or she ~~~ill Tile a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continua. a. I Phrr~~ the culi<~n ltcrs been ter~nina[ed II~ thr action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated. that part, may proceed under Ilulc230(d) for relief from the order of terrination. An c~amplc of such an oecurrcncc might be the !ermination x~a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely tilt .he notice of intention to proceed. l~hc timing ul ~hc tiling of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is tiled witl~iin thirty days of the um~~ ohthe order of termination on the docket. subdivision (d)(21 provides that the court must grant ~~:he petition and reinst,etc the action. If the petition is tiled later than the thirty-day period. subdivision (d)(3) requires ttrn the plaintiff nttist mahc a showing to the court that the petition was promptly tiled and that there is a reasonable e~planalion or !~~~itin~at~~ ~~cus~ both I<~t• the lailure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the enir~ ~~f the order of ;crmina(iun on the dnckct and for the lailure to plc the petition ~yithin the thirty-day period under subdicisic>n (d)(2j. i3. l~hc~~~r the ucvion bus not been Ie~•niinated \n action e~fiich has not been terminated but which continues upon the Tiling of a notice of intention to p~,~oceed may diave been the subject of inordinate dcla;. In such an instance. the aggrieved party may pursue tl~e rc°mcdy of a ,mu~u~u lae~ non prow ~yhich cuts indcpcndcntly oCtcrmination under Rulc 230.2.