Trefz's Estate

Philadelphia County Orphans' Court

Trefz's Estate

1 Pa. D. & C. 588, 1922 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 104

CourtPennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County

DecidedMay 18, 1922

DocketNo. 34

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Pa. D. & C. 588 (Trefz's Estate) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Trefz's Estate, 1 Pa. D. & C. 588, 1922 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 104 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

After the appeal from the Register was actually at issue, the respondent filed a petition for a citation, directed to the petitioner, to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed on the ground of laches in failing to prosecute. In the meantime, the case being at issue was, in accordance with our practice, placed on an audit list for hearing the week beginning May 1st of this year.

In applications of this character we have ruled that the person apparently in default should proceed with due celerity and have entered a decree fixing a time limit. (See Hoopes’s Estate, 23 Dist. R. 249; Kris’s Estate, 29 Dist. R. 447.)

In the circumstances of the instant case, such decree is unnecessary.

The petition is dismissed.

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

Per Curiam,

After the appeal from the Register was actually at issue, the respondent filed a petition for a citation, directed to the petitioner, to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed on the ground of laches in failing to prosecute. In the meantime, the case being at issue was, in accordance with our practice, placed on an audit list for hearing the week beginning May 1st of this year.

In applications of this character we have ruled that the person apparently in default should proceed with due celerity and have entered a decree fixing a time limit. (See Hoopes’s Estate, 23 Dist. R. 249; Kris’s Estate, 29 Dist. R. 447.)

In the circumstances of the instant case, such decree is unnecessary.

The petition is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Pa. D. & C. 588, 1922 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trefzs-estate-paorphctphilad-1922.