Appeal from order of Court of Common Pleas, Civil Division, of Allegheny County, July T., 1971, No. 1733, in case of Carmella J. Tarasi v. Irene C. Settino and Michael William Twaroski.
H. N. Rosenberg, with him Rosenberg, Kirshner & Solomon, for appellant.
Edward A. Mihalik, with him Louis M. Tarasi and Conte, Courtney, Tarasi & Price, for appellee.
Wright, P. J., Watkins, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, Cercone, and Packel, JJ.
[ 223 Pa. Super. Page 159]
This is an appeal from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County denying defendant's petition for change of venue.
Carmella Tarasi, the plaintiff in this case, filed an action in trespass in Allegheny County against both defendants arising out of an automobile accident which occurred August 4, 1969 on U. S. Rt. 19, Perry Township, Mercer County, Pennsylvania. Plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle being driven by one of the defendants, Irene C. Settino. The Settino vehicle collided with a vehicle driven by the other defendant, Michael Twaroski. Twaroski is a resident of Erie, Pennsylvania.
[ 223 Pa. Super. Page 160]
Mrs. Settino and the plaintiff-appellee are both residents of Allegheny County.
Michael Twaroski, appellant herein, had been sued by Settino in Mercer County some 14 months prior to the commencement of this suit in Allegheny County brought by Tarasi. That suit in Mercer County was still pending when the present suit was brought in Allegheny County. Appellant Twaroski, presented with the difficulty of defending two suits in two different counties, both being based on the same accident, petitioned the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County for a change of venue so that he could defend both suits in Mercer County and hopefully, at the same time. Mrs. Tarasi objected to the petition and it was denied by the court. From that denial this appeal has followed.
Although we would otherwise quash this appeal as a non-appealable interlocutory order, we are not concerned with that question here since the lower court certified the issue of venue as a controlling question of law in compliance with 17 P.S. § 211.501(b) of the Appellate Court Jurisdiction Act of 1970.
Turning to the substantive issue, we are concerned with whether the trial judge abused his discretion in denying the defendant-appellant's petition for change of venue. Rule 1006(c) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure provides that: "An action to enforce a joint or joint and several liability against two or more defendants, except actions in which the Commonwealth is the party defendant, may be brought against all defendants in any county in which venue may be laid against any one of the defendants under the general rules of Subdivisions (a) or (b)." This rule has received ...