Lamp v. Heyman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
EAGEN, Justice.
In this case we are directly confronted for the first time with the important question of whether, in Pennsylvania practice, a plaintiff, whose attorney files a praecipe for a writ of summons to commence an action within the time period permitted by the statute of limitations, instructs the prothonotary to issue the writ but not deliver it to the sheriff for service, and then has the writ reissued and served after that time period has expired, is barred by the statute of limitations from continuing the action.
On September 1, 1967, plaintiff-appellant Frances…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- James Bros. Co. v. Union B. & T. Co. of DuBoisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- GOLDMAN v. McShainSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- Zarlinsky v. LaudenslagerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
- Schmucker v. NaugleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
- Gallagher v. Jewish Hosp. Assn. of Phila.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by235 opinions
- Farinacci v. Beaver County Industrial Development AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- McCreesh v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Moses v. T.N.T. Red Star ExpressSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
- Englert v. Fazio Mechanical Services, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Advanced Power Systems, Inc. v. Hi-Tech Systems, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1992
230 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.