Hill v. Septa

EISEMAN, J.,

This matter comes before the court on defendant-petitioner’s motion for summary judgment based upon the contention that plaintiff-respondent’s original failure to properly commence an action in trespass by summons subsequently barred him from maintaining the action by virtue of the applicable statute of limitations.

FACTS

Plaintiff-respondent commenced an action in trespass on September 7, 1971, by filing a praecipe with the prothonotary to issue a summons in trespass. It is alleged by petitioner and admitted by respondent that this writ of summons was never served upon…