Appeals from order of Court of Common Pleas No. 3 of Philadelphia County, Sept. T., 1963, No. 3132, in case of J. Webster Jones v. P. M. Garrod, also known as P. McNeill Garrod, Superior Chemical Products, Inc., Sidney Koch, et al.
J. Webster Jones, with him Richard S. Clover, Randolph A. Warden, and Clover & Warden, for appellant.
Saul Finestone, for company, appellee.
Charles H. Rogovin, for appellee.
Bell, C. J., Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O'Brien and Roberts, JJ. Opinion by Mr. Justice Musmanno.
This case involves two separate appeals by plaintiff. The plaintiff, J. Webster Jones, obtained, on December 17, 1963, a judgment against the defendant P. M. Garrod, also known as P. McNeill Garrod, in the amount of $23,895.93 as a result of the defendant's failure to file an answer to the plaintiff's complaint in assumpsit.
On March 6, 1964, Jones caused a writ of execution to be issued and interrogatories filed, naming Superior Chemical Products, Inc. and Sidney Koch as garnishees. On April 1, 1964, he obtained judgment against the two garnishees for their failure to answer interrogatories within 20 days from service. On February 11, 1965, each of the garnishees filed a petition and rule to show cause why the judgment should not be stricken off, averring, inter alia:
"7. There is no proof of service of interrogatories on your petitioner in the record of the within case, there being no averment in the return of the sheriff to whom the interrogatories were given by the plaintiff for service, or anywhere else in the record, that service of interrogatories with notice to plead was made on
your petitioner, a true and correct copy of the sheriff's return being hereto attached, marked Exhibit 'A' and made part hereof.
"8. The prothonotary had no authority, without proof of service of interrogatories with a notice to plead, to enter the judgment against your petitioner for failure to answer to interrogatories, and had no authority to issue the various writs of execution against your petitioner based on the said judgment."
After answer by the plaintiff and argument before the court below, the rule to show cause why the judgment should not ...