Case ID: pa-d-c_6/html/0452-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Jones, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Holly v. Wilkes-Barre Railway Company.
    
      Practice, C. P. — Non pros.- — Laches■—Abandonment.
    Where a statement is filed two years and ten months after the commencement of a suit in trespass, there is no presumption of abandonment, but if a rule for non pros, has been taken, such rule will be held awaiting diligent prosecution of the action.
    Rule for non pros. C. P. Luzerne Co., May T., 1921, No. 41.
    
      P. E. McCullen, for plaintiff; Evan C. Jones, for defendant.
   Jones, J.

Suit in trespass commenced March 9, 1921; statement filed Jan. 9, 1924.

Petition for non pros, filed July 10, 1924, averring that by reason of the laches of the plaintiff, defendant has been prejudiced, and answer filed to the same.

Piling the statement in January, 1924, is some evidence of activity; there is at least no presumption of abandonment, and, therefore, we will hold the rule for non pros.; unless plaintiff with due diligence prosecutes this action, the rule will be made absolute.

From F. P. Slattery, Wilkes-Barre, Pa.