Court Opinion

ID: 9750202
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 14:34:37.264857+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:26:04.453708
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Pomeroy:
I join in the dissenting opinion of Chief Justice Bell, and, in addition, reiterate the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in Fox v. Mellon, 438 Pa. 364, 264 A. 2d 623 (1970), which for the most part are equally applicable to the case at bar. As indicated in Fox, I would feel differently had there at any time been an appearance, formal or otherwise, by a lawyer representing the appellant, but in the 8% months of the pendency of this suit there was none.
My reading of the record satisfies me of the correctness of the lower court’s conclusion that this is “a clear case of inattention not excused or accounted for.” This absence of excuse is, in my view, confirmed rather than dispelled by the frank admission in appellant’s brief that this is “one of the unfortunate situations that arise in the law because of the crush of increased business activity and the overcrowding of the world.” I am unable to find that the court below in any way abused its discretion (or blunted its conscience) in refusing to open the judgment.
Mr. Justice Roberts joins in this dissenting opinion.