Court Opinion

ID: 9750201
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 14:34:37.262183+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:26:04.440938
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Mb. Chief Justice Bell:
I dissent. I find no abuse of discretion, and therefore I would affirm the Order of the lower Court. Nearly every lawyer hates to take, and nearly every Judge dislikes to see, a judgment by default. Nevertheless, when we have decisions or rules of the Court they must be followed, and the Majority has in my judgment failed to follow them in this case. Pressure of work is not an equitable reason or justification for defendants’ delay — nor was any other persuasive reason alleged — in filing an answer to the complaint in trespass.
The case of Fox v. Mellon, 438 Pa. 364, 264 A. 2d 623, is on its facts distinguishable. In that case, the notice to plead was in small letters and the defendant who suffered the default judgment had only a ninth-grade education and was not represented by counsel. In the present case, notice to plead was in normal-sized type and Mr. Oates admitted that he knew the significance of the complaint, the significance of the 20-day *113time period, and understood the warning that a default judgment would be entered.
For these reasons, I would affirm the Order of the lower Court.
Mr. Justice Roberts and Mr. Justice Pomeroy join in this dissenting opinion.