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.

DEL-VAL ELECTRICAL INSPECTION SERVICE v. STROUDSBURG-EAST STROUDSBURG ZONING & CODES OFFICE (09/10/86)

decided: September 10, 1986.

DEL-VAL ELECTRICAL INSPECTION SERVICE, INC., APPELLANT
v.
STROUDSBURG-EAST STROUDSBURG ZONING & CODES OFFICE, APPELLEE



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County, in case of Del-Val Electrical Inspection Service, Inc. v. Stroudsburg-East Stroudsburg Zoning and Codes Office, No. 839 January Term, 1977.

COUNSEL

Elvira C. LaBarre, Turtzo, Spry, Powlette, Sbrocchi & Faul, for appellant.

Bernard M. Billick, Robinson, Hoffner & Billick, with him, James A. Butz, Hiscott & Robinson, for appellee.

Judges MacPhail and Colins, and Senior Judge Barbieri, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Colins.

Author: Colins

[ 100 Pa. Commw. Page 430]

Del-Val Electrical Inspection Service, Inc. (appellant) appeals an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County (trial court) granting the Motion for

[ 100 Pa. Commw. Page 431]

Summary Judgment filed by the Stroudsburg-East Stroudsburg Zoning and Codes Office (appellee) upon finding that appellant's complaint was barred by laches.

We are constrained to detail the procedures employed by the parties in this matter. On April 1, 1977, appellant, a Pennsylvania corporation engaged in the performance of inspections of electrical wiring and apparatus, filed a complaint in equity in which it averred that appellee had arbitrarily barred it from performing such inspections and which sought an order enjoining appellee from continuing to so bar appellant's operations.

In an Answer and New Matter, filed on May 24, 1977, appellee denied any arbitrary action on its part and alleged that appellant had been barred from performing further electrical inspections because of its failure to submit numerous inspection cards verifying that certain inspections had indeed been performed.

Appellant responded on July 20, 1977 in a Reply to New Matter, stating that, in its view, the pertinent ordinances did not require the submission of inspection cards and that the prohibition imposed by appellee was thus unwarranted.

No further action was taken on record until May 24, 1983, at which time the trial court, sua sponte, and in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Judicial Administration (Pa. R.J. Adm.) No. 1901, which empowers a court to purge its docket of inactive cases, issued a Rule to Show Cause on the parties as to why the instant matter should not be discontinued. Both parties answered the Rule. In its Answer, appellant indicated its intent to proceed, admitted that no action had been taken since the filing of its Reply to New Matter on July 20, 1977, and attributed the ...


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.