Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-1526JOHN D. PERKEY, Plaintiff V. ABF FREIGHT SYSTEM, INC., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA PRAECIPE FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT OF SUMMONS TO CURTIS R. LONG, PROTHONOTARY: Please issue a Writ of Summons against the defendant, ABF FREIGHT SYSTEM, INC., and enter my appearance on behalf of the plaintiff, John D. Perkey. Please direct the Sheriff to serve the defendant as follows: ABF Freight System, Inc. P. O. Box 10048 Fort Smith, Arkansas 72912 By: March 16, 2006 Respectfully submitted, IRWIN & 2006- /<1, CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW 2!r-- Marcus ?. McKnigh III, Esqu e 60 West omfret Street, A 17013 (717) 249-2353 Supreme Court I.D. No: 25476 To: ABF FREIGHT SYSTEM, INC. You are hereby notified that John D. Perkey, plaintiff, has commenced an action against you which you are required to defend or a default judgment may be entered against you, T PROTHONOTARY By: JLt - G. )h'&, DEPUTY 7ltia /(, 2006 r-? ?.? ?? -?, - `?? f ?._ ? ?? ?=, ^ =ice - ;? ;_,. - .,3 r. '? ; - ? L ' ??: ?._ fir, ' -i .. ? J ? J. G? LJ ,. :,' G ?" C` 1. dr SHERIFF'S RETURN - U.S. CERTIFIED MAIL CASE NO: 2006-01526 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND MERKEY JOHN D VS. ABF FREIGHT SYSTEM INC R. Thomas Kline Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law served the within named DEFENDANT ABF FREIGHT SYSTEM INC by United States Certified Mail postage prepaid, on the 17th day of March 2006 at 0000:00 HOURS, at PO BOX 10048 FORT SMITH, AR 72912 , a true and attested copy of the attached WRIT OF SUMMONS Together with The returned receipt card was signed by REGAN WHITWORTH on 03/21/2006 . Additional Comments: Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Cert Mail 4.64 Postage .39 Surcharge 10.00 .00 33.03 Paid by MARCUS MCKNIGHT Sworn and subscribed to before me this /tt day of 90a A.D. -? So answers- R. Thomas Kline Sheriff of Cumberland County on 03/27/2006 Prothonotary % A Nr'1k 4 ?? Ul t4tlltlrl. , . ° y 4!?' ?o?F. ¦ ?Hnhw?reMlit ` mM4twhX I ?? p solh ?wplleJWlwMltleaMnfbyau ?, gi Ijiell f fine??rY C. Gas ofownq, ¦ ,?wnhM?taawn4`YS?O?glcdtlM+?WMM?er? ? `,2 t .e? aon oa teat Naps a pwff t AAbbAddtMwdYx. ,.: /MiMitlr<tioetTtYtatz lfti?t,4AMt'dNnryndlwslNww; No t3eu ABF Fr® t System Inc PD Box Fbrt , AR 72912 xmwowmw tMM O Robpr*o m MM 0 Mpwina ? RMwrn Rgwlpc tar Mme 0 Wowd MM 13 C.O.D. 4. PA*I tad DeM,W F-%ft F* ? yes x,160 0002 11V7 7617 06-?,Ya26 civil ,3elt,e°,It?ytN1M p..t.waetwtm,n..p ,.nwaewaa JOHN D. PERKEY, Plaintiff V. ABF FREIGHT SYSTEM, INC., Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 2006- 1526 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW STATEMENT OF INTENTION TO PROCEED TO THE COURT: Plaintiff intends to proceed with the above-captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, IRWIN & By: Supreme Court I.D`N'o 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-2353 [II, Esquire 25476 Date: October 27, 2009 FILED-{r?CE OF THE pF-6T1J-CNOTARY 2009 OCT 27 PM 2: 4 7 PENNSYLVANIA _ 30_HN D . PERKEY _ PLaintiff vs Case No. 2006 - 7 `>26 _ k~ _. _-- ~ ~ -y ; _ ~•{ A]3F_ FREIGHT` SYSTEM, INC. _ ~~ t~ ~~-y_~° Defendant ~~ ~ ~„ --t v Statement of Intention to Proceed ~'~"'° N ~ -G ~ ~' -~-~ ~, ~ ~. ~~' 'L7 C3 -1'i To the Court: ''~'' ~ = ~~ ~ G' [:~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ The Plaintiff intends to proceed wit the above c tione~$'trter.W -~~' ~~ ~~,~ Print Name Marcus A. McKnight, III Sign Name __ __ _ ~ _ _ Date:. October 26, 2012 Attorney for_the 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. I. Ruie of civil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive case:A within the scope. of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for inactivity wac 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 defendaztt 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. I1 lnac[ive 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 azz 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 ^nder 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 nat 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 em:ry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the wurt 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)t2). li. 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 pruc;eed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the: aggrieved party may pursue the r;;medv of a common ]aw non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2.