Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-3117C IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff(s) & Address(es): Brett M. Schaeffer 18 Donegal Drive Carlisle, PA 17013 Case No. 10 '3? Civil Term :vs: Civil Action Defendant(s) & Address(es) Cheryl L. Cook 860 Ridge Road Carlisle, PA 17015 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania C Department of General Services 515 North Office Building Z `T -1C Harrisburg, PA 17125 C" Commonwealth of Pennsylvania De artment of A riculture za. ?c p g U 2301 North Cameron Street © i Harrisburg, PA 17110-9408 W PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF SAID COURT: Issue summons in the above case Writ of Summons shall be issued and forwarded to Attorne /Sheriff. Please Circle choice osi? !-? Signature of Plaintiff 00000 WRIT OF SUMMONS Date : May 13, 2010 Print Name: Brett M. Schaeffer Address: 18 Donegal Drive Carlisle, PA 17013 Telephone #: 717-385-7970 Supreme Court ID Number: _ TO: YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAME LAINTIFF(S) HAS/HAVE COMMENCED AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. &.j I 5 tie Al I / Prothonotary/Clerk, Civil Division Date: by ?Pq ??JJ Deputy ?9a.oo PA PI.FF oay /97/ l ~ll~t3-~~?±~'- '4 ~_ ;~ 7''c ~`~~~ ~' ~~'' ;' NARY Steven C. Gould Senior Deputy Attorney General Office of Attorney General Torts Litigation Section 15th Floor, Strawberry Square . Harrisburg, PA 17120 Direct Dial: 717-783-8035 ZO t 0 Ji~~ t 4 Pry 3: ~ g cur,~~~:F ~~.,, ~~~ ~~~ BRETT M. SCHAEFFER, Plaintiff v. CHERYL L. COOK; COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES; AND COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND CO., PENNSYLVANIA No. 10-3117 PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE Please enter my appearance on behalf of Defendants, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of General Services; Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Agriculture; and Cheryl L. Cook in the above-captioned matter. Respectfully .submitted, THOMAS W. CORBETT, JR. ATTORNEY GENERAL By: ev n C. Gould, LD. #80156 Senior Deputy Attorney General Dated: June 9, 2010 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving the foregoing document(s) upon the person(s) and in the manner indicated below: SERVICE BY FIRST CLASS MAIL POSTAGE PREPAID ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Brett M. Schaeffer 18 Donegal Drive Carlisle, PA 17013 By: TEVEN C. GOULD, I.D. #801 Senior Deputy Attorney General Torts Litigation Section 15th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 717-783-8035 -Direct Dial DATED: June 9, 2010 b,r-ed--(- M. Sci\o e'Ce :- �- J)-7c-- , z-, vs Case No. c;. °p.` £z CIer 1 L^ Co L_L�. eT hi t -. c r-- °� . Statement of Intention to Proceed - C :_a G <: C"' To the Court: �, 7'„, t�. a � : : s C intends to proceed with the above captioned matter." Print Name 13 r e'¢ ,M'5a# (Sign Name Aat A., .`2 I/ Date: 1 O/i 1 11-1)13 Attorney for / 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. I.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. 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 Ru1e230(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 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 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.