Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

THOMAS v. HEMPT BROTHERS. (01/16/61)

THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


January 16, 1961

THOMAS, APPELLANT,
v.
HEMPT BROTHERS.

Appeal, No. 383, Jan. T., 1960, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Sept. T., 1947, No. 6, in case of Adam Thomas v. Hempt Brothers. Order affirmed.

COUNSEL

Irwin Albert, with him Marian Schwalm Furman, and Jerome H. Gerber, for appellant.

Jack A. Riggs, with him Samuel A. Schreckengaust, Jr., and Myers, Myers & Flower, and McNees, Wallace & Nurick, for appellees.

Before Bell, Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Bok and Eagen, JJ.

Author: Eagen

[ 402 Pa. Page 370]

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE EAGEN.

This action involves the claim of the appellant-plaintiff against a former employer for overtime wages, liquidated damages and counsel fees under the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The issue was listed for trial during the December term list of 1955.*fn1 On December 12, 1955, appellant-plaintiff's then attorney entered a discontinuance of the action of record in the prothonotary's office. On August 19, 1959, a motion was filed to strike off the discontinuance, the substance of which motion was a claim that it was entered without the knowledge, consent or authority of the plaintiff. After the filing of a responsive answer, depositions were taken and submitted. Following a consideration thereof and argument by counsel, the court below entered an opinion and order dismissing the motion to strike off. From that action, this appeal was filed.

The lower court found factually that the plaintiff was fully aware of the entry of the discontinuance as of the date of entry and that he authorized this action of his attorney upon the receipt of a money consideration.

We have examined the record and find proof of facts and circumstances sufficient to support this conclusion. In view of this the lower court did not abuse its discretion in the action taken.

Mr. Justice MUSMANNO and Mr. Justice COHEN dissent.

Disposition

Order affirmed.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.