Peaceman v. Tedesco

Pennsylvania Arbitration Panels for Health Care

Peaceman v. Tedesco

12 Pa. D. & C.3d 638, 1977 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 8

CourtPennsylvania Arbitration Panels for Health Care

DecidedAugust 9, 1977

Docketno. M77-0141

StatusPublished

This text of 12 Pa. D. & C.3d 638 (Peaceman v. Tedesco) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Arbitration Panels for Health Care primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Peaceman v. Tedesco, 12 Pa. D. & C.3d 638, 1977 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 8 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

On June 13, 1977, plaintiffs filed with the administrator a complaint against defendants Orlando P. Tedesco, M.D., Edwin W. Shearburn, III, M.D. and The Lankenau Hospital. On June 28, 1977, preliminary objections of Dr. Edwin W. Shearburn and The Lankenau Hospital (hereinafter defendants) were filed in the nature of a petition raising the question of venue. On July 15, 1977, plaintiffs’ answer to defendants’ preliminary objections was filed and both parties have submitted a memorandum of law in support of their respective positions.

The complaint, alleging that medical malpractice was committed on wife-plaintiff at The Lan-kenau Hospital, is captioned: “In the City of Philadelphia.” Although The Lankenau Hospital has a Philadelphia mailing address it is located in Montgomery County. Therefore, defendants are correct that there is no venue in Philadelphia County and defendants’ preliminary objections are sustained. However, defendants’ request that plaintiffs’ complaint be dismissed for lack of venue will not be granted. Pa.R.C.P. 1006(e) provides for transfer of the action to the appropriate county in lieu of dismissal. It should also be noted that the designation of the county in which the cause of [639]*639action arose is required by our rules of practice only for the purpose of designating venue if an appeal is taken to the court of common pleas. Therefore, we issue the following

ORDER

And now, August 9, 1977, upon consideration of the preliminary objections of defendants, Dr. Edwin W. Shearburn, III and The Lankenau Hospital, plaintiffs’ answer to defendants’ preliminary objections, and the memoranda of law submitted by the respective parties, it is hereby ordered and decreed that defendants’ preliminary objections are sustained, and henceforth all legal papers filed with the administrator in this action shall designate in the caption Montgomery County as the county in which the alleged cause of action arose.

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

On June 13, 1977, plaintiffs filed with the administrator a complaint against defendants Orlando P. Tedesco, M.D., Edwin W. Shearburn, III, M.D. and The Lankenau Hospital. On June 28, 1977, preliminary objections of Dr. Edwin W. Shearburn and The Lankenau Hospital (hereinafter defendants) were filed in the nature of a petition raising the question of venue. On July 15, 1977, plaintiffs’ answer to defendants’ preliminary objections was filed and both parties have submitted a memorandum of law in support of their respective positions.

The complaint, alleging that medical malpractice was committed on wife-plaintiff at The Lan-kenau Hospital, is captioned: “In the City of Philadelphia.” Although The Lankenau Hospital has a Philadelphia mailing address it is located in Montgomery County. Therefore, defendants are correct that there is no venue in Philadelphia County and defendants’ preliminary objections are sustained. However, defendants’ request that plaintiffs’ complaint be dismissed for lack of venue will not be granted. Pa.R.C.P. 1006(e) provides for transfer of the action to the appropriate county in lieu of dismissal. It should also be noted that the designation of the county in which the cause of [639]*639action arose is required by our rules of practice only for the purpose of designating venue if an appeal is taken to the court of common pleas. Therefore, we issue the following

ORDER

And now, August 9, 1977, upon consideration of the preliminary objections of defendants, Dr. Edwin W. Shearburn, III and The Lankenau Hospital, plaintiffs’ answer to defendants’ preliminary objections, and the memoranda of law submitted by the respective parties, it is hereby ordered and decreed that defendants’ preliminary objections are sustained, and henceforth all legal papers filed with the administrator in this action shall designate in the caption Montgomery County as the county in which the alleged cause of action arose.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 Pa. D. & C.3d 638, 1977 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 8, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peaceman-v-tedesco-paarbpnlhc-1977.