Court Opinion

ID: 9749548
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-27 16:50:07.683327+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:25:51.546429
License: Public Domain

Concurring Opinion by
Mr. Justice Roberts:
I believe that it was proper—although not necessary—-for the court below to dismiss this case as not appropriate for declaratory judgment.
Although I do not believe that the court below lacked jurisdiction to entertain declaratory judgment proceedings in the posture of this litigation (see: Sheldrake Estate, 416 Pa. 551, 554, 207 A. 2d 802 (1965) (dissenting opinion)), in my view it was clearly a correct exercise of its discretion, see, e.g., Reese v. Tomsic, 405 Pa. 380, 175 A. 2d 528 (1961), to decide as it did that arbitration was a more appropriate remedy. And once the court sustained appellee’s preliminary objections and dismissed, the case was over and the court’s discussion of the merits in its subsequent memorandum opinion was wholly without legal effect.
Since it was a proper exercise of the discretion of the court below to dismiss this case as inappropriate for declaratory judgment, I agree that its decision should be affirmed on that ground alone.
Mr. Justice Jones and Mr. Justice O’Brien join in this opinion.