16 A.2d 2 | Pa. | 1940
Was the service upon the additional defendant, a nonresident, valid? The court below held not. The original defendant, who endeavored to bring in the additional one, appeals.
A collision occurred in Montgomery County between the automobile of defendant and that of the additional defendant, who is a resident of the State of North Carolina. Plaintiff was riding in original defendant's car. She brought suit against him in Philadelphia, where he resides. By petition under Pa. R. C. P. No. 2252, 332 Pa. cxxiii, he seeks to bring in the additional defendant. The court below made an order joining the additional defendant. Process was served on the Secretary of Revenue, as the Act of May 14, 1929, P. L. 1721, Sec. 2, as *12 amended, 75 PS Sec. 1202, permits. Notice, as provided by the act, was given to the additional defendant. She filed a special appearance and a petition under the Act of March 5, 1925, P. L. 23, 12 PS Sec. 672, to set the service aside. We think under the circumstances it was invalid.
It is not necessary to review all the cases referred to in the briefs. Most of them have already been considered inWilliams v. Meredith,
It is argued by the original defendant and by plaintiff that Pa. R. C. P. No. 2254, 332 Pa. cxxvii, authorizes the service. The rule provides that "A defendant shall have the same rights in securing service as the plaintiff had for service in said action. If the action was instituted in the county where the cause of action arose, . . . the defendant shall also have the right of service in any *13 other county by having the sheriff of the county wherein the action was instituted deputize the sheriff of any other county
wherein service may be had." No provision is made for service outside the State. Gossard v. Gossard,
The order of the court below is affirmed at appellant's cost.