Appeal Nos. 3442 and 3550 Philadelphia 1982 and 647 Philadelphia 1983 from the orders of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Civil Division, No. 88 (123) September Term, 1976; Takiff, Judge.
Daniel G. Childs, Philadelphia, for appellants.
I. Steven Levy, Philadelphia, for Forty-Eight, appellee.
Martin Greitzer, Philadelphia, amicus curae.
Cirillo, President Judge, and Cavanaugh, Wickersham, Wieand, McEwen, Del Sole, Tamilia, Kelly and Johnson, JJ. Tamilia, Judge, concurring.
[ 365 Pa. Super. Page 166]
TAMILIA, Judge, concurring:
I join the majority but file this Concurring Statement to make clear my view that the controlling law, in an appropriate case, remains that propounded in Pastierik v. Duquesne Light Co., 341 Pa. Super. 329, 491 A.2d 841 (1985) and Symbula v. Johns-Manville Corp., 343 Pa. Super. 541, 495 A.2d 598 (1985).*fn1
Initially, in order to enlighten the bench and bar as to the basic factual situation at issue, below is a verbatim summary as included in the unpublished majority memorandum:
These three appeals are from the orders of the trial court granting Appellees' motions for summary judgment. In each case, an appellant brought a wrongful death and survival action for a decedent's asbestos-related injuries and death.
[ 365 Pa. Super. Page 167]
The related issues in these appeals are: 1) the application of the "discovery rule" to the statute of limitations for wrongful death and survival actions, codified at 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5524(2), following repeal of the former statutes of limitations 12 P.S. § 1603 (wrongful death) and 12 P.S. § 34 (survival actions), by the Judiciary Act Repealer Act ("JARA") of April 28, 1978, P.L. 202, § 2a (310) (wrongful death) and (807) (survival actions), effective June 27, 1978 and, 2) the correctness of Symbula v. ...