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.

TRINITY AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT v. DICKSON ET AL. (03/27/73)

decided: March 27, 1973.

TRINITY AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT
v.
DICKSON ET AL., APPELLANTS



Appeals from order of Court of Common Pleas of Washington County, Jan. T., 1967, Nos. 242 and 243, in case of Trinity Area School District and State Public School Building Authority v. C. Garey Dickson, original defendant, et al.

COUNSEL

Thomas F. Weis and Harry J. Zimmer, with them Raymond H. Conaway, Weis & Weis, and Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebenek & Eck, for appellants.

Samuel L. Rodgers, with him Rodgers and Roney, for appellees.

Williams D. Phillips, with him Wayman, Irvin, Trushel & McAuley, for appellee.

Robert L. Ceisler, with him Patrono, Ceisler, Edwards and Pettit, for appellee.

John L. Laubach, Jr., with him Kenney, Stevens, Clark & Semple, for appellee.

Wright, P. J., Watkins, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, Cercone, and Packel, JJ. Opinion by Hoffman, J. Jacobs, J., dissents.

Author: Hoffman

[ 223 Pa. Super. Page 548]

Appellants, C. Garey Dickson and Baker and Coombs, Inc., contend that the trial court erred in refusing to join seven additional defendants. Moreover, Baker and Coombs, the only additional defendant joined by the court, alleges that the lower court erred in joining Baker and Coombs as an additional defendant.

Appellant Dickson contracted with the Trinity Area School District (hereinafter Trinity) on March 9, 1960 and agreed to provide Trinity with the architectural services needed in the construction of additions and alterations to an existing Junior-Senior High School. In February of 1965, an earth embankment involved in the project collapsed injuring the project. Trinity instituted two civil actions, one in assumpsit and one in trespass, to secure compensation for the damages. In the assumpsit action, Trinity averred that Dickson's breach of the contract caused the damage to the project. In the trespass action, Trinity charged that Dickson and William L. Kubic, an engineer employed by and working in conjunction with Dickson, were negligent in performing their duties in conjunction with the Trinity-Dickson contract.

In the assumpsit action, Dickson filed a complaint pursuant to Rule 2252(a) of the Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure,*fn1 requesting the joinder of three additional defendants: William Kubic, Ebert and Park,

[ 223 Pa. Super. Page 549]

    professional engineers, and Baker and Coombs, a general contractor. Kubic and the firm of Ebert and Park agreed to perform services for appellant Dickson in conjunction with the Trinity school project. Baker and Coombs had contracted with Trinity to serve as the general contractor in the construction of the additions and alteration to the Junior-Senior High School. Additional defendant Baker and Coombs then proceeded under Rule 2252(a) to seek the joinder of Windyhill Construction Co., Inc. (hereinafter ...


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.