Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

PRODUCE FACTORS CORPORATION v. BROWN ET UX. (04/12/62)

April 12, 1962

PRODUCE FACTORS CORPORATION
v.
BROWN ET UX., APPELLANTS.



Appeal, No. 336, Oct. T., 1961, from order of Municipal Court of Philadelphia County, Sept. T., 1960, No. 3656-A, in case of Produce Factors Corporation v. Robert N. Brown et ux. Order affirmed.

COUNSEL

Leonard S. Wissow, for appellants.

Malcolm H. Waldron, Jr., with him Waldron and Weitzman, for appellee.

Before Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ. (rhodes, P.j., absent).

Author: Flood

[ 197 Pa. Super. Page 627]

OPINION BY FLOOD, J.

The defendants executed a judgment note in the ordinary form, dated July 19, 1960, to the order of DePaul Construction Company. The note was endorsed by William Zatkin to Produce Factors Corporation, the plaintiff, which caused judgment to be entered thereon in the Municipal Court (now the County Court) of Philadelphia.

The defendants obtained a rule to strike off the judgment because (1) it was entered in the County Court without the intervention of an attorney for the

[ 197 Pa. Super. Page 628]

    defendants and (2) the record does not show that the plaintiff is the original holder or his assignee. The court below discharged the rule.

1. In Jameson Piano Co. v. Earnest, 66 Pa. Superior Ct. 586 (1917) this court held that a judgment entered in the Municipal Court of Philadelphia by the clerk of the Municipal Court without any appearance by an attorney for the defendant or declaration signed by such attorney was invalid. The fact that the prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia is by virtue of his office Clerk of the Municipal Court, it was held, did not make him the prothonotary of the latter court, and the power given the prothonotary to enter judgments on notes under the Act of 1806 did not extend to the Philadelphia Prothonotary when acting as Clerk of the Municipal Court.

It is true that judgment ordinarily cannot be entered by confession in Pennsylvania without the appearance of the defendant or an attorney for the defendant except under the provisions of the Act of February 24, 1806, P.L. 334, 4 Sm.L. 270, § 28, 12 PS § 739. At the time of the decision in Jameson Piano Co. v. Earnest, supra, this act gave power to enter judgments thereunder only to "the prothonotary of any court of record".

However, the rule of the Jameson Piano Co. case was definitely abrogated by the amendment to the Act of 1806, supra, adopted June 10, 1957, P.L. 281, § 1, 12 PS § 739 (pocket part), which ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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