Case Name: Aldridge, Appellant, v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1958-11-10
Citations: 394 Pa. 57
Docket Number: Appeal, No. 150
Parties: Aldridge, Appellant, v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company.
Judges: Before Jones, O. J., Bell, Musmanno, Jones and Cohen, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania State Reports
Volume: 394
Pages: 57–58

Head Matter:
Aldridge, Appellant, v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company.
November 10, 1958:
Argued October 6, 1958.
Before Jones, O. J., Bell, Musmanno, Jones and Cohen, JJ.
Theodore M. Tracy, with him. Edward 0. Spotts, for appellant.
William E. Eckert, with him Milton W. Lampropios, and' Echert, Seamans & Gherin, for appellee.

Opinion:
Opinion by
Mb. Chief Justice Jones,
This appeal is from a judgment of non pros entered on the defendant's petition.
Where a plaintiff neglects to prosecute his suit diligently and the delay would be harmfully prejudicial to the defendant, if the suit were to be put to trial,, the entry of a judgment of non pros is appropriate: Alker, v. The Philadelphia National Bank, 372 Pa. 327, 332-333, 93 A. 2d 699.
The facts appearing of record in the present case, and referred to in the opinion of President Judge Mc-Naughsr for the court en banc, fully justify the action of the .court below in entering the judgment of non pros. That being so, nothing is to be gained by pro-, longing the discussion. Such a judgment is .reversible on appeal only where its entry constitutes a manifest abuse of discretion (Wingert v. Anderson, 309 Pa. 402, 403, 164 A. 333) —a circumstance entirely absent in the present instance.
Judgment affirmed.