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.

METZ CONTRACTING v. RIVERWOOD BUILDERS (02/03/87)

filed: February 3, 1987.

METZ CONTRACTING, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
RIVERWOOD BUILDERS, INC. AND CHANCE ASSOCIATES, INC.



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County, Civil Division, at No. GD 82-9790.

COUNSEL

James H. McCune, Washington, for appellant.

Philip A. Fabiano, Pittsburgh, for appellees.

Brosky, Rowley and Popovich, JJ.

Author: Brosky

[ 360 Pa. Super. Page 446]

This appeal is before us from an Order entered by the trial court dismissing appellant's claim for inactivity of record and entering judgment in favor of appellee, Chance Associates, Inc.*fn1

[ 360 Pa. Super. Page 447]

The issue before us is whether appellant has shown good cause for inactivity of record for more than two years. We have scrutinized the briefs of the parties and the record, and we conclude that appellant's contention lacks merit. Accordingly, we affirm.

Appellant initiated the instant action against appellee by praecipe for a writ of summons in equity on May 14, 1982. The writ issued the same day, and service was completed on June 9, 1982.*fn2

No further activity occurred in this matter until appellee filed its Petition to Show Cause why the case should not be dismissed with prejudice on January 17, 1986. A Rule to Show Cause why the matter should not be dismissed for unreasonable activity in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. 1901 was entered against appellant, returnable February 28, 1986. On that day, appellant filed its Complaint against appellee.*fn3 A response to the Petition to Show Cause was also filed.

On March 31, 1986, the trial court entered its Order dismissing the instant case for inactivity of record and entered judgment in favor of appellee. This appeal followed.

Pennsylvania Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(a) authorizes disposition of inactive cases. The general policy espoused in subsection (a) is

     to bring each pending matter to a final conclusion as promptly as possible consistently with the character of the matter and the resources of the system. Where a ...


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.