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.

ESTATE JOSEPH T. LACHMUTH (02/01/80)

decided: February 1, 1980.

IN RE ESTATE OF JOSEPH T. LACHMUTH, DECEASED. APPEAL OF ETHEL M. BRYANT, ADMINISTRATRIX, C. T. A.


No. 637 January Term, 1977 Appeal from Decree dated August 8, 1977 of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia Orphans' Court Division, No. 2146 of 1977.

COUNSEL

Michael J. Pepe, Jr., Philadelphia, for appellant.

Counsel insists there is no opposing counsel.

Eagen, C. J., and O'Brien, Roberts, Nix, Manderino, Larsen and Flaherty, JJ. Manderino, J., did not participate in the decision of this case. Flaherty, J., files an Opinion in Support of Affirmance in which O'Brien and Nix, JJ., join. Roberts, J., files an Opinion in Support of Reversal in which Eagen, C. J., and Larsen, J., join. Larsen, J., files an additional Opinion in Support of Reversal.

Author: Per Curiam

[ 487 Pa. Page 606]

ORDER

The court being equally divided, the Decree is affirmed.

[ 487 Pa. Page 607]

OPINION IN SUPPORT OF AFFIRMANCE

FLAHERTY, Justice.

This is an appeal from dismissal of a Petition for Citation by the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Orphans' Court Division, on August 8, 1977.*fn1 The trial judge dismissed the petition on the ground that it was not typewritten or printed and thus, did not conform to Philadelphia Orphans' Court Rule 34.1 (hereinafter Rule 34.1). We affirm.

The relevant facts are as follows. Upon the demise of Joseph T. Lachmuth, appellant, Ethel M. Bryant, was granted Letters of Administration, C.T.A. by the Register of Wills of Philadelphia. Appellant subsequently filed a Petition for Citation, which is the subject of this appeal. As stated in appellant's brief,*fn2 "a Petition for Citation was prepared by typing on paper. This was edited and revised and the final product produced by xerox process, executed and filed." (Appellant's Brief p. 6). The trial judge afforded appellant the opportunity to correct the error by advising her that the "original" Petition must be filed as opposed to a "copy". Appellant states that she was unable to comply with the judge's request ...


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.