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.

REX SLOCUM v. COMMISSIONERS WARREN COUNTY (11/06/86)

decided: November 6, 1986.

REX SLOCUM, APPELLANT
v.
THE COMMISSIONERS OF WARREN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, APPELLEE



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Warren County in the case of Commissioners of Warren County, Pennsylvania v. Rex Slocum, No. 536 of 1984.

COUNSEL

Bernard J. Hessley, for appellant.

John R. Wagner, with him, John P. Marti, Harper & Marti, for appellee.

Judges Craig and Palladino, and Senior Judge Kalish, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.

Author: Craig

[ 102 Pa. Commw. Page 20]

Appellant Rex Slocum, a real estate subdivision developer, is the defendant in an equity action initiated by Warren County to enjoin development of his subdivision on the basis that he did not make certain road improvements on which the county had conditioned its approval of his subdivision plan.

Defendant Slocum has appealed from the trial court's order which dismissed his motion and complaint to join Pleasant Township, where the plan is located, as an additional defendant.

The defendant filed his motion to join the township 107 days after the filing of the county's amended complaint against him. His request thus fell well beyond the 60-day time limit in Pa. R.C.P. No. 2253, which states:

Neither praecipe for a writ to join an additional defendant nor a complaint if the joinder is commenced by a complaint, shall be filed by the original defendant or an additional defendant later than sixty (60) days after the service upon the original defendant of the initial pleading of the plaintiff or any amendment thereof unless such filing is allowed by the court upon cause shown.

[ 102 Pa. Commw. Page 21]

Before the defendant sought to join the township, the county and the defendant had agreed in writing to extend the Rule 2253 deadline for joining additional defendants as a matter of course. Pleasant Township, the proposed additional defendant, was not a party to that agreement. Pa. R.C.P. No. 248 provides:

The time prescribed by any rule of civil procedure for the doing of any act may be extended or shortened by written agreement of the parties or by order of court.

The trial court has never issued any order approving either the joinder or the agreement extending ...


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.