Appeals from order of Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, March T., 1967, Nos. 3560 and 3989, in cases of James Brown v. The Pennsylvania Railroad et al., and Arthur J. Devlin v. The Pennsylvania Railroad et al.
Stephen A. Cozen, with him Orlofsky and Cozen, for appellants.
Pershing N. Calabro, for appellee.
Bell, C. J., Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O'Brien, Roberts and Pomeroy, JJ. Opinion by Mr. Justice O'Brien.
Plaintiffs, James Brown and Arthur J. Devlin, filed complaints in trespass against The Pennsylvania Railroad
Company in August and September of 1967, alleging that they collided with defendant's train and were seriously injured on September 26, 1965 while riding in an automobile on Delaware Avenue in Philadelphia.
The railroad then joined as additional defendants Devlin in the Brown case and Joseph DiGironimo and Anthony DiGironimo, trading as J & A Catering Service [J & A] in both cases, alleging that J & A had served or furnished alcoholic beverages to Brown and Devlin at a reception preceding the accident in violation of the Dram Shop Act.
J & A in turn, on November 22, 1967, filed writs to join the Order of Sons of Italy, Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, [Grand Lodge] (appellee herein) as an additional defendant.
On December 20 and 22, 1967, Arnold Lovitz, Esquire, appellant herein, pursuant to instructions from Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co. [Hartford] filed entries of appearance on behalf of the appellee, together with rules upon J & A to file complaints.
On January 15, 1968, J & A filed complaints, alleging that if Brown and Devlin were served alcoholic beverages, it was by the Grand Lodge, not by J & A.
Thereafter, appellant, who had been engaged to represent the interests of appellee by Hartford, its liability carrier, was instructed to withdraw his appearances. Appellee was notified by letter dated March 26, 1968 that the carrier had determined that there was no coverage under its policy, and that the carrier would not defend the cases. Appellee was instructed to forward the complaints filed against it to its own attorneys and arrange with appellant for a substitution of appearance. No action having been taken by appellee, ...