Legal Opinion

Penn Savings Bank v. Best Homes & Properties, Inc.

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Pike County

Decided November 3, 1992No. 25-1992Published

1Opinion of the Court

THOMSON, Jr., P.J.,

The defendant, Best Homes & Properties, Inc., has objected to the plaintiff’s petition to reinstate the mortgage and bond on the grounds that the action was not commenced by a writ of summons, a complaint, or an agreement for an amicable action. Pa.R.C.P. 1007 and 1501.

The Rules of Civil Procedure do not provide for the commencement of an action by petition. William Garlick & Sons, Inc. v. Elizabeth Lambert, 446 Pa. 323, 325, 287 A.2d 143, 144 (1972), citing Hartmann v. Peterson, 438 Pa. 291, 293, 265 A.2d 127, 128 (1970). A petition is only permitted where it is ancillary…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hartmann v. PetersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  2. In re Correction of Official Records With Civil ActionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  3. William Garlick & Sons, Inc. v. LambertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  4. Dambacher v. Commercial Union Assurance CompaniesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API