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.

ALBERT EINSTEIN MEDICAL CENTER v. FORMAN (06/13/68)

decided: June 13, 1968.

ALBERT EINSTEIN MEDICAL CENTER, TO USE,
v.
FORMAN, APPELLANT



Appeal from order of County Court of Philadelphia, June T., 1962, No. 123-C, in case of Albert Einstein Medical Center, to use, Philadelphia Title Insurance Company v. Samuel Forman et al.

COUNSEL

Herman B. Blumenthal, with him Edward M. Rand, for appellant.

Daniel Marcu, for appellee.

John A. Mullican, for amicus curiae.

Wright, P. J., Watkins, Montgomery, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, and Hannum, JJ. Opinion by Hoffman, J.

Author: Hoffman

[ 212 Pa. Super. Page 451]

The Albert Einstein Medical Center brought suit in assumpsit against appellant, Samuel Forman, and his two sisters, on June 6, 1962, for the unpaid hospital bills of their mother, Sarah Forman. The complaint was served on the appellant and his sisters on June 6, 1962. No pleadings were filed by appellant within twenty days as required by Pa. R. C. P. 1026, and judgment was entered on July 26, 1962 in the amount of $1211.95.

The judgment was assigned to the use of the Philadelphia Title Insurance Company on July 5, 1967. The use-plaintiff then issued a writ of execution -- attachment against appellant. On July 11, 1967, a writ of revival of the judgment was issued by the County Court of Philadelphia.

[ 212 Pa. Super. Page 452]

Appellant filed a "Petition to Strike-Off Judgment and Quash Attachments" on August 14, 1967. Appellant specifically alleged: "5. Until the attachment was issued against your Petitioner, he was not aware of either the suit or the judgment that has been entered in this matter.

"6. By reason of said fact as set forth in paragraph [5] herein he did not engage counsel nor file an Answer to the Complaint and judgment was entered against him as well as against the other defendants for want of an Answer to said Complaint."

Appellant also alleged that ". . . there is no right of authority in the Acts of Assembly mentioned in paragraph 5 of the Complaint nor in any other law for the procedure taken in this matter or the resulting judgment." Appellant therefore concluded that the judgment was void.

The use-plaintiff answered the petition and denied that appellant and his sisters had no notice of the proceedings against them. It also answered that The Support Law, and cases ...


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.