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.

FRED J. BROGLIE v. UNION TOWNSHIP (09/23/83)

filed: September 23, 1983.

FRED J. BROGLIE, APPELLANT,
v.
UNION TOWNSHIP, JACK GABIG, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS CAPACITY AS SUPERVISOR OF UNION TOWNSHIP, STEVE PARISH, JR., INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS CAPACITY AS SUPERVISOR OF UNION TOWNSHIP, AND THE DAILY HERALD



No. 848 Pittsburgh, 1981, Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Washington County, August Term, 1980, Civil No. 114.

COUNSEL

George Retos, Jr., Washington, submitted a brief on behalf of appellant.

Herman C. Kimpel, Pittsburgh, for appellees.

Rowley, Popovich and Hoffman, JJ.

Author: Rowley

[ 319 Pa. Super. Page 142]

This is an appeal from a judgment of non pros entered against appellant, Fred J. Broglie, in favor of appellees,

[ 319 Pa. Super. Page 143]

Union Township, Jack Gabig and Steve Parish, Jr. We affirm.

The facts are as follows. On August 12, 1980, appellant filed a complaint in trespass alleging that he had been defamed by Union Township Supervisors, Jack Gabig and Steve Parish, Jr., while he was a candidate for the office of Supervisor of Union Township.*fn1 In response to appellant's complaint, appellees, Union Township, Jack Gabig and Steve Parish, Jr., filed preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer, including therein a motion for a more specific pleading. On November 12, 1980, the trial court sustained appellees' preliminary objections and entered an order granting appellant twenty days in which to file an amended complaint. Subsequently, a thirty-day extension of that twenty-day period was agreed to by counsel for the parties. On February 6, 1981, counsel for appellees wrote a letter to appellant's counsel reminding him of the trial court's order of November 12, 1980, and advising him that a judgment would be taken if the amended complaint was not filed within ten days from the date of the letter. On March 26, 1981, no amended complaint having been filed, counsel for appellees moved for a judgment of non pros. The specific ground alleged by appellees in support of their motion for a judgment of non pros was that appellant had failed to comply with the November 12, 1980, order of court as modified by the parties.

Argument on appellees' motion was scheduled for May 20, 1981. In the interim, on May 5, 1981, appellant filed his amended complaint, along with a reply to appellees' motion for a judgment of non pros. In his reply, appellant urged dismissal of the motion for non pros on the ground that the amended complaint had been filed of record. On May 20, 1981, the trial court sitting en banc, heard arguments on the motion for judgment of non pros, and, in an opinion and

[ 319 Pa. Super. Page 144]

    order filed July 20, 1981, granted the same.*fn2 This appeal followed.

On appeal, appellant argues that the trial court's granting of the judgment was in error because two of the three requirements antecedent to such a ruling, as set forth in James Brothers Lumber Co. v. Union Banking and Trust Co., 432 Pa. 129, 247 A.2d 587 (1968) and its progeny, were not ...


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.