Tong Xu Xu v. Montefiore Hospital

618 A.2d 1043, 422 Pa. Super. 114, 1993 Pa. Super. LEXIS 50
CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJanuary 11, 1993
Docket00687
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 618 A.2d 1043 (Tong Xu Xu v. Montefiore Hospital) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Tong Xu Xu v. Montefiore Hospital, 618 A.2d 1043, 422 Pa. Super. 114, 1993 Pa. Super. LEXIS 50 (Pa. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

TAMILIA, Judge:

Plaintiffs Tong Xu Xu and Zhangai Xu, his wife, bring this direct appeal from the March 20, 1992 judgment of non pros entered in favor of appellee Dr. Allan B. Schachter.

Prior to January 1, 1992, parties seeking relief from a judgment of non pros had the option of filing a petition to open and/or strike judgment or filing a direct appeal to this Court. Valley Peat & Humus v. Sunnylands, Inc., 398 Pa.Super. 400, 581 A.2d 193 (1990). However, on November 19, 1991, a rule was adopted which established relief from a judgment of non pros could be sought only by petition:

Rule 3051. Relief from Judgment of Non Pros
(a) Relief from a judgment of non pros shall be sought by petition. All grounds for relief, whether to strike off the judgment or to open it, must be asserted in a single petition.
Adopted Nov. 19, 1991, effective Jan. 1, 1992.

Pa.R.C.P. 3051.

Because appellants’ challenge to the judgment of non pros was made as a direct appeal, on April 20, 1992, we are constrained to quash this appeal without further discussion. 1

Appeal quashed.

Jurisdiction relinquished.

1

. Although at oral argument plaintiff's counsel informed this Court a petition to strike the judgment of non pros was properly filed, our review of the docket entries and record reveals a petition was not filed with the trial court. Including an alleged copy of said petition in the reproduced record (not time stamped) does not suffice. The appeal, moreover, was taken from the court's Order of March 20th, not from denial of a petition for relief from the judgment of non pros. We also note appellee has contested our consideration of plaintiff’s unfiled petition to strike. (Appellee’s brief, p. 7, footnote 5.)

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

Related

Stephens v. Messick
799 A.2d 793 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2002)
Sahutsky v. H.H. Knoebel Sons
782 A.2d 996 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2001)
Margolis v. Klinger
769 A.2d 545 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2001)
E.O.J., Inc. v. Tax Claim Bureau of Schuylkill County
721 A.2d 79 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1998)
LaCaffinie v. Mirk, Inc.
719 A.2d 361 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1998)
Hughes v. Fink, Fink and Associates
718 A.2d 316 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1998)
Debroff v. Corretti
645 A.2d 859 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
618 A.2d 1043, 422 Pa. Super. 114, 1993 Pa. Super. LEXIS 50, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tong-xu-xu-v-montefiore-hospital-pasuperct-1993.