International Telephone & Telegraph Corp. v. Philadelphia Electric Co.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas

International Telephone & Telegraph Corp. v. Philadelphia Electric Co.

75 Pa. D. & C.2d 240, 1976 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 212

CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County

DecidedAugust 30, 1976

Docketno. 1676

StatusPublished

This text of 75 Pa. D. & C.2d 240 (International Telephone & Telegraph Corp. v. Philadelphia Electric Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

International Telephone & Telegraph Corp. v. Philadelphia Electric Co., 75 Pa. D. & C.2d 240, 1976 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 212 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

GREENBERG, J.,

On June 21, 1976, this court entered an order vacating the prior dismissal of this case on May 22, 1974, without prejudice for defendant to file a Motion to Dismiss. “Star” Rule 350, a purely internal administrative tool of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, is designed to remove stale cases from the docket, and authorizes the court to reinstate actions previ[241]*241ously dismissed on application therefor. It is not, nor was it intended to be, a substitute for a motion for non pros or to dismiss proceedings for lack of prosecution. This must be done in accordance with the applicable law.

Accordingly, we entered an order reinstating the case without prejudice to defendant’s right to file the motion to dismiss in the ordinary course.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

GREENBERG, J.,

On June 21, 1976, this court entered an order vacating the prior dismissal of this case on May 22, 1974, without prejudice for defendant to file a Motion to Dismiss. “Star” Rule 350, a purely internal administrative tool of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, is designed to remove stale cases from the docket, and authorizes the court to reinstate actions previ[241]*241ously dismissed on application therefor. It is not, nor was it intended to be, a substitute for a motion for non pros or to dismiss proceedings for lack of prosecution. This must be done in accordance with the applicable law.

Accordingly, we entered an order reinstating the case without prejudice to defendant’s right to file the motion to dismiss in the ordinary course.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 Pa. D. & C.2d 240, 1976 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 212, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/international-telephone-telegraph-corp-v-philadelphia-electric-co-pactcomplphilad-1976.