Legal Opinion

Herb v. Snyder

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 9, 1996No. 669PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KELLY, Judge:

In this appeal, we are called upon to determine whether, after two years of docket inactivity, on motion of a defendant, the trial court may properly enter a judgment of non pros where the defendant has failed to take any action to advance the listing or re-listing for argument of his preliminary objections. Because a delay caused by a defendant or properly chargeable to a defendant cannot be a ground for the entry of a judgment of non pros against a plaintiff, we hold that the trial court properly denied the motions for the entry of a judgment of non pros. Accordingly, we affirm.

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Penn Piping, Inc. v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  2. Pennsylvania Railroad v. PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  3. Pennridge Electric, Inc. v. Souderton Area Joint School AuthoritySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  4. In Re Handwriting Exemplar of CasaleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  5. POLUKA v. ColeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1972

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State of the Art Medical Products, Inc. v. Aries Medical, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  2. Matusow v. ZiegerCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  3. Commonwealth v. YinglingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  4. Doyle v. TesauroSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  5. Kensey v. KenseySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API