Case ID: pa-super_296/html/0088-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

442 A.2d 310
    FRED LOWENSCHUSS ASSOCIATES, Appellants, v. Peter Anthony De PALLO, Arlene Frances De Pallo, Mildred Ann De Pallo, Diane De Pallo, and Carol Joy De Pallo.
    Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
    Argued Nov. 6, 1981.
    Filed Feb. 26, 1982.
    
      William D. Parry, Philadelphia, for appellants.
    Bernard V. DiGiacomo, Norristown, for appellees.
    Before CAVANAUGH, BROSKY and MONTGOMERY, JJ.
   PER CURIAM:

The appeal in this case arises from a lower court order granting the Defendant-Appellees’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The lower court’s action was based upon its interpretation of Montgomery County Rule of Civil Procedure 302(d), which requires that a responding party file its brief “within thirty (30) days of the filing and service of the moving party’s brief”. There is no dispute that the Appellants’ brief was filed one day later than thirty (30) days after the filing of the Appellees’ brief in support of their Motion, but within thirty (30) days of the service of the Appellees’ brief.

We must reverse the lower court’s order. An identical issue was presented in the recent case of Shapiro v. Albright, 287 Pa.Superior Ct. 414, 430 A.2d 672 (1981), wherein this Court rejected a similar action by the lower court in Montgomery County. Our holding in that case is directly on point to the issue involved in the instant case, and clearly requires that we reverse the order which granted judgment on the pleadings in favor of the Appellees.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings in the lower court. This Court does not retain jurisdiction.